US vassals have banded together in a vote of the International Criminal Court’s 21-state ‘Bureau’ to suspend ICC chief prosecutor Karim Khan. Khan has been driving the ICC’s issuance of arrest warrants for Israeli war criminals, including Benjamin Netanyahu and former ‘defence’ minister Yoav Gallant.

ICC — Shameless political stitch-up

Israel and the US have previously circulated allegations against Khan – a standard Israel lobby tactic – of improper behaviour. Now Khan has been suspended by the Bureau on a supposed ‘no indication of guilt’ basis. But as former UK ambassador Craig Murray points out, the move is a shameless and politically-driven stitch-up:

The rest of the world should impose sanctions against the 21 criminal states. Just as the ANC encouraged sanctions against their own country (apartheid South Africa) we should encourage sanctions against our own imperialist or client countries.

— Mark Howell (@markhowell7) June 9, 2026

The US, Israel and their allies will now be working overtime to pressure other ICC signatory nations to try to secure the votes required to take down Khan at the coming “special session of the Assembly of States Parties”.

Featured image via Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images

By Skwawkbox

The Israeli occupation regime has hired a Hollywood producer for $900,000 to run its attempts to influence US citizens. Support for Israel has plummeted in the US across the political spectrum, especially among young people including Jewish young people:

New Jewish Voter Resource Center poll finds “nearly half of young American Jews are functionally anti-Zionist”

A recent Washington Post poll found that 61% of Jewish adults said Israel had committed war crimes against Palestinians in Gaza, while 39% said it was guilty of… pic.twitter.com/yQcvQYXbO1

— Max Blumenthal (@MaxBlumenthal) May 28, 2026

Daniel Rosenberg, who produced Spike Lee’s Inside Man, has been appointed to produce pro-Israel content for social media channels. He and his firm will also hire a director and an acting cast. Payments are being routed through German firm Havas, the same company that funnels payments to so-called influencers in return for pro-Israel posts. Unlike most Israel lobbyists in the US, the contract is being registered under ‘FARA‘, the US ‘Foreign Agents Registration Act.

Israel — Murder project

The project is being run by Eran Shayovich, the Israeli foreign ministry’s chief of staff. Israel has massively increased the amount it is spending on propaganda. Its genocide in Gaza, slaughter of children, its assassinations of journalists, peace negotiators and medics, continue to shred its global standing and expose the racist murder-project it really is.

Featured image via MUBI

By Skwawkbox

The UAE-backed Rapid Support Forces (RSF) have been accused of genocide, massacres and sexual violence. Sudan’s civil war has raged for three years with the backing of foreign and regional powers. Now survivors have filed the first war crimes complaint in Kenya.

Twelve victims backed by a Swiss legal NGO urged Kenya’s chief of prosecution to pursue the case. Associated Press (AP) reported on 9 June:

It is the first attempt to prosecute members of the Rapid Support Forces, or RSF, the paramilitary group fighting against the Sudanese military for over three years, outside Sudan.

Adding that:

The group, which has been accused by rights organizations of committing atrocities amounting to war crimes and crimes against humanity, has ties with Kenya’s government.

AP said:

Kenyan President William Ruto has previously hosted RSF leader Gen. Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo for talks that he said were aimed at advancing peace efforts in Sudan, a move that sparked diplomatic tensions.

The twelve survivors are working with the Switzerland-based NGO Legal Action Worldwide. Their testimony details:

torture and sexual violence committed by RSF members at various locations in and around Khartoum between April 2023 and March 2025 when the Sudanese capital was controlled by the paramilitaries.

The charges against RSF included that their victims:

were held in inhumane conditions, with little or no food, limited access to water, and inadequate sanitation facilities. They allege that they were beaten, burned, suffocated, subjected to electric shocks, and sexually abused, including through rape.

Additionally:

Some were reportedly forced to transport dead bodies from detention facilities.

RSF is backed by the UAE but many other nations have made the war worse through active participation or through humanitarian inaction.

Rapid Support Forces and Sudan’s ongoing foreign-backed civil war

The RSF, backed by the UAE, is fighting the Sudanese government, with gold interests and regional influence at stake.

Numerous foreign actors, including the UK, have caused the war to fester through active participation and/or outright passivity. Israel, too, is a player in the war.

The war in Sudan is theoretically between the Arab-majority RSF and the Sudanese government. But foreign states pursuing their own interests are backing the combatants.

Turkey, Egypt and many more countries are pursuing their own interests in Sudan too. British military components have also shown up on the battlefield in RSF hands. The UK is a major arms supplier to UAE.

The RSF has killed Sudanese civilians in vast numbers. Some estimates say 150,000 people have died and more than 10 million civilians have been displaced by fighting.

Sources have also claimed the UK downgraded the situation in Sudan to avoid “pissing off the Emiratis”.

Drone war over Sudan

Drones have been a major feature of the war. Both RSF and Sudanese government forces have deployed them. On 9 June government forces engaged RSF drones over the capital Khartoum. The Sudan Tribune reported:

Military sources said a Rapid Support Forces (RSF) drone attempted to bomb military sites northwest of Omdurman before ground defences intercepted it and prevented it from reaching its targets.

The same sources said air defences also engaged strategic drones in East Nile, with no casualties reported.

A recent UN report said drones were a serious threat to life and limb in the war:

Drones caused more than 80 per cent of civilian deaths in Sudan’s war during the first four months of 2026, killing at least 880 people.

UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk condemned both sides for their use of unmanned aerial weapons:

Armed drones have now become by far and away the leading cause of civilian deaths.

And the Ayin investigative network reported that clashes between local people and RSF allies in Sudan’s south have resulted in a village being burned:

violence last month killed at least 61 civilians, including women and children, who were targeted during clashes between the [RSF-aligned] SPLM-N, led by Abdel Aziz al-Hilu and the Ottoro tribe in Kauda.

Part of the conflict is due to:

the Ottoro’s refusal to allow the SPLM-N-allied Rapid Support Forces (RSF) to mine in their area.

The submission of a first official war crimes complaint is a good sign. Yet lawyers say allegations are hard to corroborate in a country gripped by war and devastation. A semblance of peace and justice for Sudan in this foreign-backed war may still be a long way off.

Featured image via Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images

By Joe Glenton

Israel fanatic Bari Weiss is set to take over the running of CNN’s editorial operations when Paramount Skydance’s planned purchase of Warner Bros Discovery is approved as expected. Weiss was imposed on CBS’s news operation in 2025 by its new, Zionist owners, despite no newsroom experience — with a naked pro-Israel agenda. The move has ruined the reputation of CBS as a serious news organisation, lost it some of its best-known faces and seen them replaced by pro-Israel mouthpieces.

Weiss — spreading the plague

Although the $110bn deal is not yet signed, both Paramount and CNN have said they expect it to go through in late summer to autumn of 2026. While a number of other names are said to be in line to run commercial operations, Weiss is favourite for news and editorial.

When your ideology is murderous racism, buy the media

The move is the latest in a series of acquisitions by Zionist ultras of media and social media platforms that have exposed Israel’s genocide in Gaza. The main figure in these buy-outs – helped ruinously in the case of TikTok by US government manoeuvres to force the sale — is Oracle founder Larry Ellison. Ellison and his family also control Paramount Skydance.

The billions spent on buying information channels to prevent the public hearing about Israel’s crimes are a clear indication that Israel and its lobbyists know their racist ideology has nothing to recommend it. That means that control of what people hear is their only hope of minimising the damage Israel’s mass murder and endless crimes against humanity continues to do to its global standing.

Regardless, the terror state must be made a pariah. Instead, politicians bought up like news stations continue to collude in genocide, racist land-theft and war.

Featured image via Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

By Skwawkbox

The number of working days lost to strike action plummeted by almost two thirds during Labour’s first year in power. This is according to new analysis from the GMB union.

The 12 months leading up to July 2024, when Labour won power, saw 1,406,000 working days of strikes.

During the year following Labour’s win, there were 559,000, a huge drop of more than 60%.

The GMB will discuss the figures, which come from analysis of Office of National Statistics data, at its annual congress in Blackpool.

Lifting the wages of millions of low paid workers and improvements to employment rights, such as day one sick pay, help explain the drop, the union said.

Ross Holden, GMB head of research and policy, said:

Workers go on strike when work doesn’t pay and bad bosses don’t listen.

It’s no wonder we saw the biggest strike disruption in decades under the Tories who took the side of bad bosses and left our economy in chaos.

This drop in strike days shows that employers have nothing to fear in Labour’s plan to Make Work Pay. It must be delivered in full.

Featured image via Leon Neal / Getty Images

By The Canary

Itamar Ben-Gvir, a genocidal terrorist and Israeli Minister of National Security, has suggested that Israel kidnap Lebanese women and children to “break Hezbollah’s morale”.

That’s right, after he spent two years pleading with the world to help release the Israeli hostages and using it to justify carpet-bombing Gaza, Ben-Gvir now wants Israel to take even more hostages than it already has in its prisons.

By his own standards, that gives Lebanon the right to flatten the whole of Israel.

During a security cabinet meeting, where several officials backed escalating its illegal attacks in Lebanon, Ben-Gvir said:

Let’s start thinking outside the box about Hezbollah.

Conquering territory and killing many terrorists, but also detaining their women and youth and taking them to terrorist prisons.

That’s what hurts them the most.

Of course, there are two problems here.

First of all, Israel is not just targeting Hezbollah, like they keep claiming. The settler-colonial state has been systematically wiping out entire towns in Southern Lebanon for months.

Secondly, even ‘targeting Hezbollah’ is against international law, given that anyone living in occupied territory has the right to armed resistance under international law.

But of course, openly genocidal, convicted criminals such as Ben-Gvir do not give a rat’s arse about international law.

Ben-Gvir himself has been convicted of supporting Israeli terrorist organisations and having a portrait of the Israeli terrorist —  Baruch Goldstein — in his office.

Ben-Gvir is also the man behind the new law, which allows the death penalty only on Palestinians.

Only recently, Ben-Gvir joined a group of fellow illegal settlers to raid the Al-Aqsa Mosque in occupied East Jerusalem.

Basically, Ben-Gvir is an all-around top bloke who really deserves a seat in government.

Ben-Gvir — ‘Most moral army’

Netanyahu repeatedly bangs on about Israel having the most moral army in the world.

What sort of ‘morals’ involve kidnapping women or children?

Here’s the most moral army in the world. Wanting to kidnap women and children so they can be tortured and raped in an Israeli death camps https://t.co/roVGJCiWvt

— newoods (@newenglans007) June 9, 2026

We already know that Palestinian prisoners are repeatedly raped and abused in Israeli prisons. Israelis have a strange definition of the word ‘moral’.

You know which other army regularly took hostages, and then raped and abused them? The Nazis.

But if we point that out, it’s aNTiSeMITiSm.

Since Israel and the US’s illegal attacks on Lebanon in 2024, Israeli forces have abducted several Lebanese civilians. The exact number remains unknown.

They are among 1,316 people that Israel is currently holding under the “unlawful combatant” law, including Palestinians from Gaza and Syria. This law essentially legalises incommunicado detention and enables enforced disappearance. Whilst this concept is not technically illegal, that is because international law does not formally recognise it as a distinct legal status. Instead, international humanitarian law states that:

every captured individual in a conflict must be classified strictly as either a prisoner of war (POW) or a civilian.

According to Amnesty International:

While international humanitarian law allows for the detention of individuals on imperative security grounds in situations of occupation, there must be safeguards to prevent indefinite or arbitrary detention and torture and other ill-treatment. This law blatantly fails to provide these safeguards. It enables rampant torture and, in some circumstances, institutionalizes enforced disappearance.

However, it is well recorded that Israel detains people indefinitely. This means that, like most things that Israel does, the whole concept of ‘unlawful combatants’ breaks international law.

It is clear that the only solution to end Israel’s genocidal regime is disarmament, isolation, and sanctions.

Israel is a terrorist organisation and should be sanctioned, isolated and disarmed at once https://t.co/dgEAqnpyYm

— StanleySau (@StanleySau1) June 9, 2026

Because, let’s face it, if any other country, minus the US or Israel, behaved in the same way, the rest of the world would have a serious issue with it.

When Israel does it the US govt and US media doesn’t call it terrorism.

Israel and America are #1 terrorists in the world. But are you too weak to break out of that fairytale they sell you on the daily about this country? https://t.co/NfCI9wQPyp

— L.A. Raider (@LARAIDER12) June 9, 2026

Imagine saying ‘kidnap women and children’ in the same sentence as you call someone else a terrorist. It doesn’t really work, does it?

Ben-Gvir belongs in the Hague, along with the rest of his murderous colleagues.

Feature image via Amir Levy/Getty Images

By The Canary

Reform — The trade unions have hit back against Farage’s recent pitiful appeal to try to bring the UK labour movement over to the far-right. Quite unsurprisingly, they’ve seen through his ridiculous claim that:

Reform is now the party of workers.

Farage also invited unions to apply for affiliation, and welcomed union leadership to attend the party conference. However, those same leaders have now told him where to shove it in reply.

‘Let’s be crystal clear’

On 8 June, the Times published an interview with Nigel Farage, trying to lure trade unions into affiliation with Reform UK.

The fascist rag highlighted plummeting support for Starmer’s Labour among union members — hardly surprising in itself. However, that drop was accompanied by growing support among the membership base for Reform UK. 

Unfortunately for Farage, the unions themselves haven’t conveniently forgotten all the time his party have spent bashing workers’ rights. Nor, for that matter, are they in the mood to overlook the fact that Reform UK rests firmly in the pocket of big business.

Responding to the Reform leader’s two-faced appeal, Trades Union Congress (TUC) general secretary Paul Nowak said:

Let’s be crystal clear: Reform are no friends of working people.

If they were, they wouldn’t be planning to rip up workers’ rights like day one sick pay and protection from fire and rehire and zero-hours contracts.

And they wouldn’t have a leader who backs privatising the NHS.

Add to that Reform’s repeated calls to scrap the Equality Act — the foundation stone of protections from discrimination in the workplace.

Reform cosplaying as the workers’ friend

Nowak continued:

Reform can cosplay as champions of workers all they like. But the reality is they’re bankrolled by corporate interests and crypto billionaires who want the rules rigged even further in favour of the rich and powerful, not working people.

And let’s not forget many of their leading voices have shown contempt for trade unions – the very organisations that won the rights and protections they want to strip away.

Reform will say whatever they think it takes to win votes. But their record – and their agenda – tells the real story.

The TUC highlighted that, just last year, Farage boasted that Reform would “go to war” with “leftwing teaching unions”. He even went so far as to accuse union members of:

poisoning the minds of young people, not just against Reform, but against everything this country has ever stood for.

We at the Canary prefer the term ‘history lessons‘.

‘A threat to the working class’

Of course, it wasn’t just the TUC that shut the door in Farage’s smug face. Even those that have — with good cause — cut down on their affiliation with Labour gave short shrift to Reform. Unite general secretary Sharon Graham, for instance, said:

If I had a pound for every politician who said they are the party of workers I’d be a rich woman. Reform have shown absolutely no evidence that they are friends of workers. Not signing up to the Employment Rights Act, inferring privatisation of the NHS and threatening local authority pensions seems the exact opposite.

What needs to happen now is for the Labour party to stop dithering and be the voice of workers. A little less conversation – a little more action.

Likewise, the Fire Brigades Union recognised the Reform leader for the Thatcherite waste of space that he is. The spokesperson added that:

Firefighters and other workers will see this ludicrous stunt for what it is by a party led by multimillionaires that is a threat to the working class.

The same also goes for the Transport Salaried Staffs’ Association. General secretary Maryam Eslamdoust branded Farage’s invite as a “desperate gimmick” that wouldn’t succeed in conning her organisation’s members.

Reform ‘Don’t believe in basic rights’

Of course, Labour’s closer allies in Unison also gave Farage the middle finger. Andrea Egan, the union’s general secretary, said:

It’s a con to think Nigel Farage and his rich cronies are interested in unions for anything but cold, hard cash. They don’t believe in basic rights or fair pay and consistently voted against every measure to improve them.

Gary Smith, GMB’s general secretary, highlighted the fact that Reform is a refuge for Tory turncoats — hardly the workers’ friend. Speaking to the Guardian, he stated that:

Mr Farage and his Reform MPs say one thing to workers and do another.

They voted against sick pay and other essential safeguards. They even want to prevent people organising to make work better at places like Amazon. We see them for what they are – rebadged Tories after union members’ basic rights.

The unions stand together

However, the most damning vote of no-confidence of all was probably that from Community. The union represents numerous different trades, including a significant share of UK steelworkers.

Not to be taken in, Community’s assistant general secretary, Alasdair McDiarmid, simply said:

The Reform party has consistently voted against the interests of working-class people while under his leadership.

It is clear Farage will say whatever it takes to win votes, but workers will see through his misrepresentations.

Reform UK recently made a big song and dance about offering a ‘redress scheme’ for steelworkers’ pensions in an attempted appeal to a tokenised symbol of British industry.

However, what far-right scum like Farage and his cronies don’t understand — what they can’t understand — is the ‘union’ part of trade unions. Reform don’t get to play divide-and-conquer with worker’s rights, trying to woo steelworkers with one hand whilst bashing teachers with the other.

The labour movement stands together — and it stands firmly opposed to Farage, Reform, and the rest of the UK’s fascist wannabes.

Featured image via Ian Forsyth/Getty Images

By Alex/Rose Cocker

The Trump family pocketed at least $100 million from India’s richest dynasty, the Ambanis, through a secret stake in an obscure Texas refinery startup.

A pattern also seen with another billionaire, Gautam Adani, reveals a consistent U.S. strategy: first, threaten tariffs, sanctions, or prosecution; then, after money flows from Indian billionaires toward the U.S., make the legal and trade problems disappear.

In exchange for the Indian investment in the Texas refinery startup, the White House delivered a string of major policy wins for the Indian energy conglomerate, including a Venezuelan oil license, according to a ProPublica investigation published Tuesday.

NEW: Earlier this year, an obscure startup in Texas announced that it had received at least $100 mil from one of the richest men in Asia.

We dug into the backstory. We discovered a saga involving Donald Trump Jr., Russian oil, and an Indian billionaire family’s private zoo. pic.twitter.com/wqusoBA0e5

— Josh Kaplan (@js_kaplan) June 9, 2026

According to the article, these policy wins were a trade deal that slashed tariffs on Indian goods from 50% to 18%, a license for Reliance to buy sanctioned Venezuelan oil, and an early waiver for India to buy Russian crude after the Iran war began (a waiver later expanded to all countries).

The ProPublica article implied that hawks like Peter Navarro had to be sidelined or overruled once the Ambani money flowed in.

Before the investment, Navarro publicly attacked “India’s politically connected energy titans” for “funding Putin’s war machine” — a clear jab at the Ambanis, who own refineries in India.

The White House denied any conflicts of interest, and Reliance said there was “no connection” between the investment and these outcomes.

Timeline of events

According to the article, in August 2025, the U.S. doubled tariffs on India to 50% to force India to stop buying Russian oil. The

The US had said India’s imports of Russian oil undermined US efforts to counter Russia’s activities in Ukraine.

Then in November 2025, Donald Trump Jr. visited India, where he toured the Ambanis’ private zoo with Anant Ambani.

Then, in February 2026, the U.S. struck a trade deal with India, slashing tariffs from 50% to 18%. That same month, the U.S. also reportedly gave Reliance a license to buy sanctioned Venezuelan oil.

In March 2026, America First Refining announced it had received at least $100 million from Reliance. Trump Jr. had secretly acquired a stake in the start-up.

After the US attacked Iran, India received an early waiver to buy Russian crude, a waiver later expanded to all countries.

“Bizarre” flow of money

One could ask why a developing country like India is sending money to the United States instead of the other way around.

Last month, the Financial Times posed exactly that question, noting that India has “committed” to purchasing $500 billion worth of American goods over five years during Rubio’s visit to India.

The FT called the arrangement “bizarre,” noting that negative net foreign direct investment, more money leaving India than entering, is already weakening the rupee.

India’s bizarre $500bn ‘commitment’ in trade deal with US https://t.co/Ev0ouYcrAc

— FT World News (@ftworldnews) May 26, 2026

The FT said it would be “foolish” for Modi to accept a trade deal currently being negotiated that is not favourable to India. It said:

The Modi government has been on the defensive about a trade deal with Washington since Trump came into office. The expectation in New Delhi was that India would be among the first to secure one, but things soured, and India ended up among the most heavily tariffed countries. There has been considerable pressure on the commerce ministry to deliver a deal. But the fundamentals have changed. And it would be foolish for India to sign an agreement that appears to take far more than it gives.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

A final trade deal still hasn’t been signed.

Talks were supposed to wrap up in March, but then the U.S. Supreme Court ruled many of Trump’s tariffs illegal, throwing everything into chaos. Now, even as negotiators meet, the U.S. is proposing new tariffs on India, including an extra 12.5% on Indian exports over forced labour concerns.

Trump said last week he’s confident a deal will get done soon because he likes Modi.

Trump confident of India trade deal despite new tariff threat https://t.co/BYAHz4z4sZ

— BBC News (World) (@BBCWorld) June 5, 2026

Trump — Identical playbook with Adani

The Justice Department, in November 2024, had charged Adani with paying $265 million in bribes to Indian officials. The Treasury Department was investigating alleged Iran sanctions violations.

Then, in April 2026, Adani’s attorney, who also happens to be a personal attorney for President Trump, said his client wanted to invest $10 billion in the United States but could not do so while the cases proceeded.

The Trump administration on Monday moved to dismiss criminal fraud charges against Indian billionaire Gautam Adani, while also settling alleged Iran sanctions violations involving one of his companies. https://t.co/TVIVTmsKxR

— Reuters Legal (@ReutersLegal) May 18, 2026

Soon, the Trump administration moved to dismiss the criminal fraud charges. The Treasury settled the sanctions case for $275 million, a fraction of the $10 billion investment promise. The SEC also settled its civil case.

In both instances, a confrontation with the Trump administration — over Russian oil, over Iranian oil, over bribery allegations — was resolved after dollars flowed toward the United States from India.

What is clear is the pattern by the US — pressure, payment, pardon, and repeat.

Featured image via Carl Court/Getty Images

By The Canary

Great Yarmouth, a place where families gather all year round, come together and visit the seaside, eat ice cream and play on the arcade machines. But deep down the seafront, hidden in the industrial estate, lies a factory that is responsible for making the parts that, without them, the F-35 jets wouldn’t be able to operate. The company is called Spectrum Control LTD.

You won’t find much advertising for it; in fact, if you go to the factory itself, there are no big signs on the doors or obvious branding. But if you dig deep enough into a combination of the company house, export license data put together by the campaign against arms trade, Spectrum has been making and supplying parts for the F-35 jets that have been used in Israel’s genocide of Gaza.

So who owns the place in Great Yarmouth?

From my findings, Spectrum Control LTD is listed online via Companies House under number 02721281 and, on paper, is typically a British company. But it is actually owned by AEA Investors LP, a private equity firm based in New York.

This firm is worth BILLIONS in assets in aerospace, defence and industrial manufacturing. To be precise, this firm goes all the way back to pure American elite power. It was founded in 1968 by the Rockefellers, the Mellon family and the Harriman family.

AEA manages £15 billion in invested capital. AEA took over spectrum control in 2019 from its parent company, API Technologies, which, to them, just sits there alongside handfuls of other businesses in their portfolio.

The directors

There are two directors listed on the company house website. First, we have Neil Snowdon, a British citizen who was given the role in November 2022. He works as Spectrum Controls’ vice president and managing director in the UK and EMEIA region. So in short, he sees the day-to-day at the Great Yarmouth factory. Snowdon’s LinkedIn shows how he is posting about RAF Typhoon upgrades and UK defence supply chains, but he actually has a boss himself; he reports to the US CEO, who is on the company’s executive leadership team. His name?

Richard Dennis Sorelle, sometimes known as Rich, is an American national listed as the other director of Spectrum Control and has been since 2021.

Rich has over 35 years of experience in defence electronics. Before Spectrum Control, he was the CEO and chairman of Abaco Systems, which is, in short, another military electronics supplier. When he took over spectrum control, he said he was looking forward to bringing his experiences in radar and sonar to the company (gross). He did an interview with Microwave Journal, and he described Spectrum Control and its mission as “protecting human life ” See the irony there, considering he’s making parts that help jets kill innocent children in Gaza.

Neither of these men work in Great Yarmouth, and no one from the local community was consulted or informed about this, and inquiries received no response.

Neither Snowdon or Sorelle have commented on the factory’s participation in its F-35 programme.

The invisible loophole

UK companies that ship and supply anything to do with F-35 jets don’t go through normal arms export licensing. What they go through alternatively is something called an open general export licence. What this means is registered companies have authorisation to export unlimited amounts of F-35 related parts to places like Israel without needing to apply for individual licenses.

Don’t believe me? The government’s own OGEL documents confirm this, and the campaign against arms trade has mapped every single UK company registered for this license.

The scary part is we have no idea how much has left the factory in Great Yarmouth, where it went and what aircrafts in has ended up in.

Funny how the UK government, when announcing a partial suspension on arms export licenses to Israel in 2024, seems to exempt F-35 components, giving factories loopholes to be able to still supply F-35 jet parts to countries using them for genocide.

The secret business

So when we think of spectrum control, we think obviously of the factory that’s making the F-35 components, but what if I told you they also run another business called SSIA.

SSIA (secure systems and information assurance), based in Gloucester, not Great Yarmouth, has been designing and making equipment for one of the most secret areas of military tech for well over 30 years, and its name is Tempest.

To put it short, Tempest is short for a NATO/government programme that handles the fact that every device leaks electromagnetic signals, and those signals can be intercepted by rivals, and they can manipulate what’s on the screens, what’s being typed, and what’s being broadcast.

Tempest Tech has been built to counter that.

This is also the first and only company in UK history to be NCSC accredited under GCHQ. And to work here, you have to have complete tight security clearance.

So, Spectrum Controls SSIA section supplies the military, government, and NATO with TEMPEST certified equipment, which includes secure computers, encrypted coms hardware and all of this is owned by the Rockefellers.

Our question is, why is the UK government allowing a Rockefeller-owned company in New York to handle our sensitive data?

The town that never got a say

We all know Great Yarmouth is not the wealthiest place; in fact, it’s one of the most deprived places in the UK. It sits among the bottom 20% of the most economically deprived areas nationally, and it seems to be the target of these awful industries profiting off the murder of children.

And yes, the company does employ people locally, and I’ve witnessed with my own eyes how some of the staff react to the locals trying to raise awareness, and I’m not sure if it’s silence out of fear of not wanting to lose your job because you feel like you have no other choice or just simply not caring.

I want to highlight the people who are locals and are trying to raise awareness about this issue. There’s a group of amazing activists who have been campaigning to get this factory shut down for a while, and they need your help.

When I first started journalism, I went and joined them at one of the protests outside the factory in August of 2025, and I could really feel the urgency for them to get the message across, but because Yarmouth is very far and secluded, people won’t know about it unless it’s amplified, and that’s what I’m doing right now.

The locals should be informed about what companies want to set up factories in their areas and be given a say on whether they want something like an arms factory to be operating in a town that also serves as a holiday destination for families. These companies make millions, and the community in itself is struggling. How about the government invest money in building community centres for these people instead of building factories that aid Israel’s murder mission?

Put the pressure on in Great Yarmouth

I grew up in Norfolk – in fact its funny, I was born there and lived in Great Yarmouth for a year as an adult. To me, I always associated it with the place people came to for the summer. The seafront is full of shops, arcade stalls, and things for families to do. It has one of the most popular high streets, but the work typically runs off seasonal trade, meaning after the summer, most shops shut, and people are left without work. It makes you wonder if this factory is put there on purpose, as people feel like they have no choice but to take the work that’s available to them.

But we still have questions and have sent off an FOI request to the Great Yarmouth Borough Council and ask them to disclose all communications between them and Spectrum Control, and we are still awaiting a response. Because between the Rockerfellers’ New York firm and Norfolk’s trading estate, accountability has gone missing, and I’m on the hunt for it.

And why did the mayor of Yarmouth stand with Snowdon and celebrate the 80th anniversary in 2023 of the site? Did the mayor know what the factory was making, and if she did, why would she endorse such a thing?

For now, all we can do is show up, put pressure on the spectrum control and listen to what the locals want.

By Sip the System

The US launched revenge-strikes after an Iranian drone knocked out an Apache helicopter on 9 June. The US hit two reservoirs in southern Iran, leaving tens of thousands without drinking water in 40-degree heat. The Geneva Convention insists military forces must distinguish between civilian and military infrastructure.

The attack was reported as a footnote by legacy media. NBC said:

Around 20,000 Iranians have lost access to drinking water after two reservoirs were reportedly struck in U.S. strikes, according to the Iranian judiciary’s official news agency, Mizan.

The news agency reported the development after Abdolhamid Hamzehpour, CEO of Hormozgan Province Water and Wastewater Co., said two concrete water storage reservoirs had been hit in Sirik county.

NBC cited the Mizan news agency saying:

that with high temperatures above 40 degrees Celsius or 104 degrees Fahrenheit, conditions for residents had “become extremely difficult and critical.”

Adding:

Hamzehpour had earlier told state-run IRIB news agency that teams were working to implement alternative measures to ensure access to drinking water.

US strikes for revenge, pure and simple

The latest wave of strikes were in response to the shooting down of a US Apache helicopter on 9 June. The Canary reported:

The US military had originally claimed that a technical fault caused the crash. The helicopter’s crew survived and was picked up from the sea.

Adding:

The ‘Longbow’ variant of the apache is set up for surveillance and for support of special forces. Former US special forces officer, Lt Col Antony Aguilar, described it as hard to shoot down and said that similar aircraft had been used a week earlier to attack Iranian civilian vessels.

In a move typical of the US president:

Trump attacked Iran for successfully defending itself and has described the escalated aggression as “defensive”.

US-Israel attacked Iran first on 28 February without provocation. Iran was offering unprecedented concessions in negotiations at the time. The Pentagon has since stated there was no imminent threat from Iran. And the UN’s atomic watchdog, the IAEA, has said there is no evidence Iran was developing a nuclear weapon.

The US has achieved none of its original war aims. Iran predictably closed the Straits of Hormuz, a vital oil channel, once attacked — creating a global energy crisis. Far from being defeated, Iran has said the war will continue until “the enemy’s inevitable and permanent humiliation, disgrace, regret, and surrender”. Trump came to power on an anti-war ‘America First’ ticket. He now faces worldwide humiliation.

As Trump flails, seeking an exit from his war of choice, Iranian civilians continue to suffer. The US reservoir strikes may constitute a war crime. The US and Israel have operated with impunity carrying out hundreds — if not thousands — of other near-daily attacks on civilians. A decaying empire is a dangerous thing, as the people of the region know only too well.

Featured image via U.S. Navy via Getty Images

By Joe Glenton

CND is calling on the government to stop wasting public money on its nuclear weapons black hole.

This comes after the latest spending report from the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) revealed the UK is now spending more on its nuclear weapons than Russia.

Collectively, the nine nuclear weapons states spent a record $119bn in 2025 on maintaining, modernising and expanding their nuclear arsenals. This was an increase of 19% ($16.8 billion) on the 2024 bill.

UK moves into nuclear weapons top three

The UK overtook Russia as the world’s third biggest spender, spending $12.6bn (£9.6bn), an increase of 17%.

This spending includes:

• Operating costs of Britain’s current four Vanguard nuclear-armed submarines.
• Building the replacement to Vanguard – the Dreadnought submarine.
• Maintenance of Britain’s nuclear weapons stockpile.
• Development of a new nuclear warhead, Project Astraea.

It doesn’t include the costs of the 12 F-35A nuclear-capable fighter jets the government announced it was purchasing in June 2025.

This shocking surge in nuclear spending comes as the government’s own Public Accounts Committee criticised the MoD for a lack of transparency over its ‘ever-increasing nuclear expenditure’.

Nuclear weapons spending is expected to rise to 20% of the total MoD budget for 2025–26, and increase to up to 25% in coming years.

According to ICAN, the top nuclear spender globally was again the US which spent $69.2bn. This was an increase of 22% from 2024 and totalled more than all the other nuclear weapons states combined.

China was second, spending $13.5bn, an increase of 7%. Behind the UK was Russia with an increase of 6% to $9.5bn. Of the others, France spent $7.7bn, India $2.8bn, Pakistan $1.5bn, Israel £1.2bn, and North Korea $656m.

The report also found that arms companies involved in the manufacture of UK weapons had sought to influence government policy. According to open access data cited in the report, senior government figures met with representatives of the following arms companies:

• Airbus.
• Amentum.
• Babcock International.
• BAE Systems.
• Bechtel.
• Boeing.
• General Dynamics.
• Honeywell International.
• Leidos.
• Leonardo.
• Lockheed Martin.
• Peraton.
• Rolls Royce.
• RTX (Raytheon).
• Safran.
• Thales.

The report noted that Airbus and BAE Systems, who had 44 and 35 meetings respectively, also included meetings with the prime minister’s office.

CND general secretary Sophie Bolt said:

This is a timely report that comes when the British government is planning to make savage cuts to public spending in order to fund more hikes to military spending. Britain’s nuclear weapons are a black hole, swallowing up even greater proportions of the Ministry of Defence’s already ballooning budget.

It is Britain’s replacement of its nuclear weapons system which is driving these huge nuclear weapons spending increases. This is contributing to a much more dangerous world where the threat of these world-ending weapons being used in war is the highest it has been since the Cold War.

Far from keeping us safe, Britain’s nuclear-armed submarines are totally dependent on the US administration, which ties us even more closely to Trump’s reckless leadership that is dragging the world into more and more reckless wars that could go nuclear.

With the government’s upcoming Defence Investment Plan expected to give at least £15bn more to the military, it’s time to end the wasteful spending on war and nuclear weapons and redirect it into tackling the real security issues we face – from climate breakdown and the looming cost of living crisis.

Featured image via Andrew Linnett / MoD Crown Copyright via Getty Images

By The Canary

The Mental Health Foundation has released The Foundation Reports: The state of mental health inequality in the UK, based on data following 40,000 individuals over 15 years.

The report found higher levels of poor mental health than recently reported in other datasets. One in four adults in the UK (25%) now experiences mental distress. That’s 14 million people. This has risen from 17% since the period immediately following the 2008 financial crisis. And that means an additional 4.8 million people now experience poor mental health just 16 years later.

The evaluation of the Understanding Society dataset involved examining data gathered from 2009 to 2024 to discover what is driving unequal levels of mental health across the country. The size and depth of the dataset allowed researchers to evaluate how these factors impacted different social groups. Across the fifteen years, people in financial distress experienced the greatest rise in poor mental health.

Mental health inequality

In the most recent data, more than half of people who were financially struggling (54%) experienced poor mental health, more than three times the rate of those who are financially comfortable (17%).

The gap between the poorest and richest people has increased by 50% the last 15 years. There was a 28.9 percentage point gap in 2009. But that’s risen to a 43.4 percentage point gap in the most recent data.

Women and young people were also found to have been disproportionately affected. Nearly one in three young people (31%) are now experiencing poor mental health. This compares with less than one in four (23%) people aged 25 and above. More than one in four women (28%) experienced poor mental health, compared to one in five (21%) men.

Mental health inequalities between these groups have also risen steeply since 2009. This is particularly notable for younger people, for whom there was no inequality in 2009, but who now experience a 7.5% higher rate of mental distress than older groups.

The Foundation Reports follows a Delphi process, conducted by the Mental Health Foundation, in which more than 40 experts in the field identified which factors drive unequal outcomes the most.

By combining the results of the Delphi process with the evaluation of Understanding Society data, The Foundation Reports’ authors found that previous governments’ austerity policies, the Covid-19 pandemic, and the subsequent cost-of-living crisis have been the main factors driving the widening of mental health inequality.

Mark Rowland, chief executive at the Mental Health Foundation, said:

The Foundation Reports exposes how financial inequality has become intertwined with poor mental health in the UK. Almost 5 million more people are experiencing poor mental health than in 2009. It is people who are less well off, younger, or women who are hardest hit and paying the greatest price.

Clearly, decisions of successive UK governments have made mental health outcomes worse. Examples include austerity, the response to Covid-19, and failing to address the cost-of-living. These have contributed to record levels of poor mental health, particularly among vulnerable groups.

This is a UK-wide issue. We’ve found that financial inequality in the UK is the biggest driver of unequal mental health outcomes in all four nations. The UK and devolved governments’ failure to support those on lower incomes is one of the largest public health mistakes in decades. Policies have also disproportionately damaged women and younger people’s mental health.

The announcement of a mental health plan for England provides a vital opportunity for government to turn the tide. To reduce mental health problems, all UK governments must prioritise tackling poverty and access to debt advice.

We need better support for people returning to work, and greater security for those who will never be able to do so. Governments must also support women and younger people through policies that address the specific challenges these groups face, like access to housing.

Featured image via

By The Canary

The Green Party has opened up a staggering lead with 18-24 year olds according to one poll:

POLL | Greens lead with 18-24 year olds:

Grn: 35% (+17)
Lab: 19% (-22)
Ref: 17% (+8)
Con: 8% (-)
Lib: 7% (-9)
Your: 4% (+4)

(Source: @focaldataHQ)
—
+/- vs GE2024 data pic.twitter.com/L0LBqjcjGP

— Stats for Lefties (@LeftieStats) June 9, 2026

It’s almost as if they’re the only party which is acknowledging the issues young people face.

Meeting needs

The above isn’t the only poll to have shown the Greens leading with young people. This, from March, shows the party leading with everyone under the tender age of 65:

NEW | Greens lead with all voters under 65, reveals latest YouGov survey:

— 18-64s —
Grn: 26%
Ref: 20%
Lab: 17%
Con: 13%
Lib: 14%

— Over 65s —
Ref: 33%
Con: 26%
Lab: 15%
Lib: 14%
Grn: 6%

Poll: @YouGov, 1-2 March pic.twitter.com/Kaa1pBYBJ3

— Stats for Lefties (@LeftieStats) March 3, 2026

It’s not hard to see why.

Reform and the Tories mostly target retirees. This older generation is largely secure, having bought their houses at rock bottom prices. While that’s great for them, it does also make them more vulnerable to the message that ‘people are coming to steal what’s yours‘. Young people, meanwhile, can’t afford to buy their own homes, and as such they’ve nothing to conserve – excluding them from the conservative instincts of their grandparents.

Labour’s plan in government has been to pursue changes so marginal that no one even notices them. They’ve also completely abandoned young people on issues like the minimum wage:

Page 45 of Labours 2024 manifesto stated: "Labour will also remove the discriminatory age bands so all adults are entitled to the same minimum wage"

Pat McFadden is asked, when are you going to do this?

McFadden says its not up to the govt to do it. pic.twitter.com/RSVJaZvf7x

— Saul Staniforth (@SaulStaniforth) May 31, 2026

Under this Labour government, young people are facing an under-employment crisis (one which began with the Tories, to be fair).

As Politics UK reported:

– Mid- and lower-skilled jobs have fallen by around 1.6 million over the past 20 years

– Hospitality vacancies have nearly halved in the last 4 years

– Apprenticeships for 16-24-year-olds have fallen by 35% since the Apprenticeship Levy was introduced in 2017

– The proportion of 16-17-year-olds in paid work has nearly halved from 35% in 2006 to 19% today

– If every current inactive 18-24-year-old was in full-time work, this would contribute an additional £38 billion to UK GDP

– 58% of inactive young people (6 in 10) have never had a job

And as we reported in turn:

As life has gotten more expensive in the UK, many young people are living at home for longer. This means fewer of them need to take the dead-end jobs that many of us accepted to ensure we could pay the rent. The knock-on effect is young people have less disposable income, and as a result they don’t go out, meaning fewer jobs in the hospitality sector. Increasing the minimum wage would better incentivise work, which would better drive economic activity.

So this is what the young can expect under Labour and the Tories:

• Live with your parents.
• Be in student debt for most of your working life.
• Struggle to get a job.
• Be blamed for everything wrong with the country.

In other words, it’s increasingly hard for young people to have hope for the future. And as such, it’s easy to see why the Greens are proving to be so popular.

Greens messaging

These are the sort of messages that Zack Polanski and the Green Party are putting out:

Rising rents, cost of further education, the climate crisis.

There's lots for young people to worry about.

Yet they have a plan & the determination to end Rip off Britain.

Join us: https://t.co/Q27Jy5eX7z pic.twitter.com/EBAKibIOu3

— Zack Polanski (@ZackPolanski) May 28, 2026

"Austerity is a false economy. If you don't invest in young people, if you burden them with student debt rather than public investment, that's why we get the kind of problems we've got."

Zack Polanski on why investing in young people matters. pic.twitter.com/H7pqhJ1PhH

— The Green Party (@TheGreenParty) February 19, 2026

With the establishment parties implicitly arguing that ‘things can only get worse’, it’s easy to see why the Greens are cutting through.

Featured image via Jon Rowley (Getty Images)

By Willem Moore

A 14-year-old activist stood up to an Israel supporter’s aggression during an assault in Montreal, Canada yesterday, 9 June 2026. The aggressor was a woman known as Sandra allegedly associated with white supremacist media. The Canadian government continues to support Israel’s genocide.

Embarrassment in Montreal

As the young man filmed the assault, the woman tried repeatedly and unsuccessfully to grab his phone and intimidate him. Uncowed, he turned his attention to her companions, embarrassing one man enough to have him claim that he is “no bloody Zionist”:

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by F̷R̷E̷E̷ P̷E̷O̷P̷L̷E̷ P̷O̷W̷E̷R̷ (@freepeoplepower)

One observer commented:

A Zionist woman named Sandra ATTACKED a 14 YEAR OLD activist in Montreal, Canada. A grown adult assaulting a CHILD, she definitely represents what Israel stands for.

Featured image via CityNewsMontreal

By Skwawkbox

Andrew Giuliani, head of the White House team tasked with organising the 2026 World Cup, defended the US authorities’ decision to bar Somali referee Omar Abdulkadir Artan and a number of administrative officials from the Iranian national team from entering the United States, stressing that these measures were taken for “very valid reasons”, according to AFP, reporting on a seminar organised by the Atlantic Council think tank in Washington.

The comments come at a time of growing questions regarding the security measures taken by the US in the days leading up to the start of the tournament, which it is co-hosting with Canada and Mexico, particularly following the barring of Artan from entering the country despite holding a valid visa, and the refusal to grant visas to a number of officials accompanying the Iranian national team.

Why did the US bar the Somali referee from the World Cup?

Giuliani has reignited the controversy surrounding the case of Somali referee Omar Abdulkadir Artan, after he was detained at Miami airport for several hours before being returned to Turkey, thereby preventing him from officiating at World Cup matches.

The US official refused to disclose the specific reasons that led the authorities to take the decision, but he stressed that the ban was not a random measure.

He said:

There was a referee who was not allowed to enter. I cannot go into details, but what I can say is that it was for a very good reason.

He added that US authorities are balancing the hosting of a global event open to the public and sporting delegations with the need to uphold national security requirements.

He explained:

We are trying to strike a balance between welcoming everyone and ensuring that any malicious actors attempting to enter the country under the guise of the World Cup are unable to reach the United States.

Artan, who was named African Referee of the Year for 2025 and has officiated matches in major continental and international tournaments, was set to make his World Cup debut before being barred from entering the US.

Iranian officials denied entry to the US

On the Iranian front, Giuliani confirmed that all members of the Iranian national team’s coaching staff had been granted entry to the United States, whilst a number of administrative officials had been denied visas.

He said:

All members of the Iranian national team’s technical staff are allowed to enter. There are Iranian officials who cannot enter, and that is also for very valid reasons.

He noted that some people might identify themselves as part of sporting or technical delegations, whilst having links to other entities, adding:

As you can imagine, there are people who claim to be coaches, but they may not be.

He continued that some of the names subject to scrutiny may be directly linked to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, without providing further details or public evidence to support those claims.

Giuliani also revealed that 35 teams have so far managed to enter the United States without any players or coaches being barred from participating, emphasising that the bans were limited to a small number of officials and administrators.

These statements mark the first public justification by a senior US official for the decisions that sparked widespread controversy ahead of the biggest World Cup in history, at a time when US authorities continue to refrain from disclosing the detailed reasons behind the ban on the Somali referee and certain Iranian officials from entering the country.

Featured image via Jay Biggerstaff/Getty Images

By Alaa Shamali

Howard Leigh, a Tory peer, has asked the House of Lords why it was stopping Israel’s occupation forces (IOF) from being able to “finish the job” in Lebanon.

Leigh, disgustingly, said:

The only successful way of dealing with, in effect, Iran in Lebanon through Hezbollah, is through military action. At what point do the British Government stop spending British taxpayers’ money helping the Lebanese Government, and, instead, allow the IDF to finish the job?

His words were so shockingly genocidal that even Starmer’s ally and Cabinet MP Jenny Chapman had to respond with how wrong Israel’s actions were:

With respect, I fundamentally disagree with the noble Lord. I wonder what he means by “finish the job”, given what we are seeing and the numbers of civilians who have been killed. Over three and a half thousand civilians, including children, have been killed indiscriminately. I could, perhaps, understand a targeted action. There would be questions about that too, but what we are seeing now is wrong.

Clearly, the genocidal Lord concluded the only remaining option was military action: letting the IOF finish the job, regardless of Lebanese sovereignty or civilian life.

Leigh is a staunch Israel ally and a member of the Conservative Friends of Israel. Earlier this year, he protested in the HoL about the suspension of some of the arms sales by the UK to Israel.

UK complicity in war crimes in Lebanon

The Anglo-American Zionists’ ethnic cleansing in Lebanon is an extension of their genocide in Gaza and their wider war on Iran. What began with the flattening of Gaza has now spread north: the same doctrine of collective punishment, the same destruction of civilian infrastructure, the same forced displacement dressed up as self-defence.

In Lebanon, more than 3,500 civilians have been killed, including over 240 children. More than one million people have been driven from their homes, over one in five of the entire population.

As British historian William Dalrymple has noted, Israeli leaders have openly stated they will demolish villages, prevent displaced people, mostly Shia, from ever returning, and create a permanent security zone inside Lebanese territory. Under international law, deliberately displacing a religious group and making their return impossible amounts to ethnic cleansing.

Dalrymple also called out Sky News’ blatant misrepresentation of ethnic cleansing in Lebanon as Israel “taking a stronger stance.”

British politicians still being neocolonialists

Labour Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper confirmed in the House of Commons that the UK is carrying out counterinsurgency by proxy.

Responding to Conservative MP Mark Pritchard, who had asked about engaging non-Hezbollah Shi’a political movements, Cooper said:

…we need an inclusive process in Lebanon that brings all groups and communities together but excludes Hezbollah, Iranian-backed proxies and terrorist and extremist groups. The group that he mentioned is led by Speaker Berri, who met my hon. Friend the Minister for the Middle East as part of his recent visit. We will continue to engage with that movement and more widely with the Lebanese Government about the importance of bringing all communities together so that the Lebanese people are not exploited by Iran.

Hezbollah is a dangerous terrorist organisation. It is undermining the security of the people of Lebanon. We support the Lebanese Government and the Lebanese armed forces in taking action against Hezbollah. We are providing them with direct support, including funding and capabilities support, because we believe it is hugely important that they should be able to do this with international support.

Essentially, Cooper is confirming that Britain will bankroll and train the Lebanese state to fight Hezbollah, while excluding Hezbollah from any political solution. She is embracing the Amal movement (led by Speaker Berri) as a preferred partner instead, and ignoring that this strategy risks tearing Lebanon apart along sectarian lines.

Leigh’s language might be shocking, but it is representative of the whole British imperial establishment, from politicians to the media, who are backing ethnic cleansing in Lebanon.

Featured image via Getty/Adri Salido

By The Canary

Scotland looks set for an AI data centre crisis after plans were revealed detailing a massive number of data centres planned for construction on Scotland’s Central Belt.

ARPS, Scotland’s countryside charity, published an interactive map illustrating where the data centres are earmarked for.

The charity compiled the data over growing concerns about the impact of the data units on electricity prices, communities and the environment.

So far, at least 18 such data warehouse projects are seeking planning permission, the National reported, with a  further six in the pipeline.

ARPS is calling for the ­Scottish government to implement a moratorium on these centres until it does a “proper “assessment of the ­impacts on the electricity grid, ­climate emissions and communities”.

A spokesperson for the charity, Kat Jones, said:

Hyperscale data centres are some of the biggest buildings in the world and this is why we are seeing them being proposed mainly on greenbelt and Greenfield sites.

Their main requirements are large quantities of land and ­access to huge amounts of electricity and ­water. These buildings are huge, but the amount of energy they use is ­absolutely off the scale.

AI data centres: How might they impact you?

Kat Jones stated that the total demand for ­energy from the data centres in Scotland’s planning system is now 6,200 megawatts (MW).

Combined with the requirement for the six sites that haven’t completed all the ­planning stages yet, this would take the ­total to more than 11,000MW. That’s nearly three-times Scotland’s peak winter demand.

Jones didn’t hold back on stating the case clearly.

This is an inconceivable amount of energy that Scotland is being asked to divert to the use of hyperscale AI data centres, which will enrich a few billionaires in Silicon valley at the expense of the Scottish consumer.

No discussion on energy in ­Scotland can ignore the impact that these data centres would have on our electricity grid and energy prices.

We are calling for a moratorium to get some proper planning and ­policies in place.

Campaigners are rightly concerned about rising energy prices. In the US, areas with data centres have soared up to 267% according to Bloomberg data.

Communities must be consulted

Scottish communities are rallying against plans near them and have been encouraged by a recent UN report.

The report details the environmental impacts of AI and says communities must be included in discussions about data centres.

AI-sceptic, pro-democracy campaign group, Pull the Plug, told the Canary:

Data centres have become a key issue in our political conversation. They contribute to climate change, impact the wellbeing of our communities, undermine public services, and push up household bills and our general cost of living.

The public increasingly stomachs the costs of data centres without agreeing to them. That has to change.

Scotland resists the Datageddon

Scottish people are not taking the matter lightly. Hyper-local campaigns are emerging across the nation to resist the ugly, thirsty, energy-hungry monstrosities. Remember when wind turbines were “eyesores”?

Last week, more than 200 people attended a public meeting to oppose a data centre near Auchtertool village in Fife. The community council said it was “appalled” by Fife Council’s decision not to request even an environmental impact assessment.

Another campaign has been launched to halt a similar development in the Borders. They’ll hope to achieve a similar result as that in Edinburgh earlier this year.

Edinburgh councillors voted unanimously to refuse a proposed hyperscale centre at the former Royal Bank of Scotland headquarters in South Gyle.

One spokesperson for Save the ­Lammermuirs – Stop the Data ­Centre said afterwards that worries remained about the ­environmental impact.

We weren’t able to get any solid information and there is also the question of the local benefits – the numbers didn’t really hold up under scrutiny at this stage.

Sunlaws Development Company wants to build the Southside Data Centre on land near the village of Longformacus. The planned development on Roxburghe Estate is for three large, two-storey data centre buildings, each with a height up to 24m and ground footprint circa 27,000m².

Campaigners allege that it will lead to the “industrialisation” of the Lammermuir Hills, and are ­sceptical of the job and economic benefit ­estimates. About 100 members of the public attended an initial consultation at Longformacus Village Hall this week.

The SNP is already criticising the “great renewables robbery” where Scottish energy firms are forced to pay £1 billion to access the national grid. Companies in England and Wales get paid to do so.

But this massive, anti-worker construction madness — done entirely on the SNP’s watch  — must be counted as further theft of the people’s energy needs by unaccountable tech companies.

Featured image via the National

By Cameron Baillie

Politicians and social commentators from across the UK have taken to social media to condemn the racist riots that have swept Belfast – and the shameless far-right agitators who helped fan the flames.

As the Canary previously reported, rioters carried out a wave of pogroms in Belfast and nearby towns over the last two days, carrying out arson attacks on homes belonging to people of colour. The racists also attacked businesses they perceived as the property of ‘foreigners’, blocked roads, and set fire to vehicles.

The hate crimes followed a knife attack, reportedly perpetrated by a Sudanese man, on the evening of 8 June in North Belfast. Police charged the suspect, Hadi Alodid, with attempted murder. The victim suffered injuries to his neck, back and both eyes, losing use of the left eye.

In response, Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) and Traditional Unionist Voice (TUV) politicians, along with English race-baiters like Nigel Farage and Rupert Lowe carried out varying degrees of the familiar song and dance: condemning the violence whilst also using dogwhistles and whipping up further racial hatred.

Belfast: shameless exploitation

However, Green leader Zack Polanski condemned the ministers stoking the riots for political gain:

Politicians who fanned these flames should hang their heads in shame.

Time and again we've seen this story play out. Single incidents used to fuel a far right narrative – and communities across the nation paying the price. https://t.co/kyDQWoE9EB

— Zack Polanski (@ZackPolanski) June 10, 2026

North Herefordshire Green MP Ellie Chowns also echoed similar sentiments:

Horrified by the attempts of bad-faith actors to use Monday's brutal attack as justification to enact violence, disorder, and the targeting of immigrants and people of colour across Belfast.

Hatred has no place in the UK – nor should politicians who seek to incite it.

— Dr Ellie Chowns MP (@EllieChowns) June 10, 2026

The Lib Dems’ Ed Davey voiced his shock, whilst also pointing out the far-right’s shameless weaponisation of fear:

I am horrified by the disorder and racist violence in Belfast last night.

Far too often now, we see extremists exploiting people’s anger and grief to spread hatred and violence – with the help of divisive algorithms on social media.

This has to stop.

— Ed Davey (@EdwardJDavey) June 10, 2026

A ‘chilling display of racist violence’

Labour’s Nadia Whittome, meanwhile, didn’t mince words:

The attempted murder in Belfast was an appalling act of brutality by one individual. It has been universally condemned and the perpetrator has been arrested and charged.

Torching the homes of innocent people because they’re not white is a truly chilling display of racist…

— Nadia Whittome MP (@NadiaWhittomeMP) June 10, 2026

A “chilling display of racist violence by organised fascists” – if only half our MPs were so willing to call these riots what they are. 

Your Party co-leader Jeremy Corbyn posted a statement on the “utterly sickening” violence on display. He also called out Nigel Farage’s dogwhistle for bringing us to this point:

When politicians demonise migrants and call for "pure, cold rage", people listen.

My statement on the sickening far-right violence in Belfast. pic.twitter.com/KLAuXR7XN1

— Jeremy Corbyn (@jeremycorbyn) June 10, 2026

Likewise, the Alliance Party’s Sorcha Eastwood turned her rage against Farage’s counterparts in Northern Ireland:

A child being rushed from a burning building by a riot police officer into a police landrover as everything goes up in flames.

I hope those who fanned the flames are content with themselves. Because they knew this violence was coming. You can't light the touch paper and expect… pic.twitter.com/kCOEQ5rnEH

— Sorcha Eastwood MP (@SorchaEastwood) June 10, 2026

Divided we fall

Meanwhile, outside the halls of Parliament, campaigning researcher Zoe Gardner set up a stark dichotomy:

Dress it up however you like – this racist violence has been deliberately whipped up by far right politicians & their cowardly wannabes in the supposed mainstream.

You are either fighting against the anti-migrant narrative or you are with these thugs. https://t.co/OOMmuvDU2W

— Zoe Gardner (@ZoeJardiniere) June 9, 2026

Turn Left Media editor Ben Mclaine pointed out the actual “two tier policing” at play:

Strange to think that the far right probably did more criminal damage in a single night than Palestine Solidarity movements have done in the past three years.

Two tier policing, indeed.

— Ben Mclaine (@BenMclaine) June 10, 2026

It seems that several commentators had it in for Farage’s talking points, at that. He threatened more riots, and now we’re seeing arson attacks on the streets of Belfast.

Journalist Owen Jones also pointed out the hypocrisy of the far-right’s reaction. However, his thread (and it is a thread) focused on the lack of riots following similar crimes by white extremists:

In 2024, a white neo-Nazi tried to behead a Kurdish barber.

Did Patrick Christys say:

"I preferred our country before white men started trying to behead people in the street"?

No. He said zilch.

Both the perpetrator and the victim had the wrong skin colour for condemnation https://t.co/ljKO6vwXxI pic.twitter.com/R1EFts9TFW

— Owen Jones (@owenjonesjourno) June 9, 2026

Last but not least, the Good Law Project hit several of the same notes we’ve seen so far:

An isolated tragedy in Belfast is being used as an excuse for racist thuggery, all in the name of patriotism.

Musk, Farage and their cronies are spreading hate, and trying to divide our communities.

But we won't let them. We know the truth: there's many, many more of us than… pic.twitter.com/Gw3pgJ3xGw

— Good Law Project (@GoodLawProject) June 10, 2026

The UK is currently speeding along head-first in its descent into fascism. The far-right is using any and every excuse they can to stir up white-supremacist violence and racial hatred.

We cannot fight this tide by offering watered-down versions of Reform’s talking points, packaged up as the ‘moderate alternative.’ Those of us who oppose these racist riots must stand with immigrants and people of colour in the UK.

Divided, none of us can hope to win out.

Featured image via Getty/Charles McQuillan

By The Canary

On 9 June, we reported that ex-Reform councillor Charlotte Kelly had defected to the Tories. Kelly blamed the move on sexism and bullying from her former colleagues. And since then, she’s come forwards to provide more information on what went down:

Ex-Reform UK councillor Charlotte Kelly admits she’s embarrassed to have ever joined the party.

She defected to the Conservatives yesterday – claiming she was bullied and faced sexism.

Reform UK says she was the source of ‘disharmony’ within the Staffordshire group. pic.twitter.com/kAtcvcVHfR

— Lewis Warner (@LewisJWarner) June 9, 2026

Former Reform councillor feels ’embarrassed’

In the video above, Kelly says:

I feel really sad and I feel embarrassed that I believed everything that they said because I fully bought in. I did. Now I just feel very let down.

It should be pointed out that the things Reform promises publicly are also very bad. And given the party’s hostility towards various minority groups – and women – Kelly shouldn’t be all that surprised to have discovered they were hostile towards her.

At the same time, this obviously doesn’t excuse the alleged bullying she had to put up with. We just hope Kelly’s experience helps others to avoid what she describes having experienced.

When asked how the last few days have been, Kelly said:

Stressful.

ITV’s Lewis Warner then explained:

Charlotte Kelly joined Reform UK hoping to make Leek a better place. But she says her time in the party has only made her own life worse. She alleges bullying, sexism and a culture that left her feeling isolated and ignored.

It would be interesting to know which Reform policies Kelly thought would improve her area, but the interview doesn’t get into that. Kelly responded:

It just seems to always be targeted at me. It’s not the men, it’s always me.

Kelly claims a female colleague told her the male Reform councillors couldn’t help themselves because of their age. We’re not sure how old they all are, but if this statement is true, they’re too old to be in the workplace.

Freeing

Kelly claims Reform does not tolerate any dissent whatsoever, and when asked how the party treats councillors, she answered:

I would say that as long as you do as you’re told, they’re fine, and as long as you don’t expect anything from head office, you just pretty much get left.

Kelly added that she had no freedom to express opinions, and that:

They want you to vote and say and just do as you’re told and whether or not you think it’s right, which isn’t… And I started to ask questions and speak out. And when I did, I was, especially from one particular person, reacted with swearing, abuse and… are really awful behaviour.

Kelly isn’t the first Reform councillor to make such claims, as we reported in this piece:

• Councillors claim Reform stopped them acting in local interest.

Defector Rob Parsonage said of the party:

He added: “We were being sent orders from above – they wanted us to vote down everything net zero and fight DEI [diversity, equity and inclusion] – but in the end it turned into a conflict between the national agenda and the role of a councillor.”

Councillor Nick Brown, meanwhile, said:

When we took control [of Durham Council], I believed the messages from Nigel Farage that we would make big changes for people living locally.

But really, whenever we had a local issue, we were told to follow the party line. Not to rock the boat, bring press attention on the council. We all turned into Nigel’s yes-men – ordered to be on best behaviour to help him get to power.

Vetting issues?

Seemingly talking about the systemic issue of sexism, Kelly said:

they are not vetting correctly to see whether or not people have these views. When you present these issues and say that they’re there, that they’re not doing anything about it.

Reform definitely has an issue with sexism, much like it has an issue with every other form of bigotry. We don’t think the issue is that the party’s vetting is ‘failing’, however; we think Reform simply doesn’t care if its politicians hate women or people from minority groups.

Featured image via Leon Neal (Getty Images)

By Willem Moore

Content warning: This article contains descriptions of sexual abuse and harassment 

The billionaire co-owner of West Ham Football Club, David Sullivan, resigned on Saturday ahead of a joint BBC and Times investigation alleging he’s a sexual predator.

The Panorama documentary broadcasts allegations made by several women that Sullivan abused his position of power and influence to prey on women for sex.

Since 2023, officials have banned Sullivan from being alone with members of the women’s and youth teams.  An investigation uncovered concerns serious enough to prompt safeguarding restrictions around female players.

The porn tycoon has insisted this was not a “disciplinary ban”, but it’s increasingly evident that it was a preventative ban to protect women and girls from harm.

However, like most sexually abusive men, Sullivan refutes the allegations as having “never happened”.

His resignation letter from West Ham read:

After a lifetime spent building businesses in the adult industry, in which I have met thousands of women, it is sadly inevitable that a small number of improper conduct claims are being made against me.

As a result, we find ourselves wondering how many women may have endured such abuse in their youth but stayed silent over fears they’d be disbelieved due to Sullivan’s status. 

David Sullivan was branded the ‘Sultan of Sleaze’ after building an empire of 150 sex shops and cornering the adult entertainment market before taking joint control of West Ham United in January 2010.

“I am not embarrassed by what I have done,” Sullivan told The Times in 2007.… pic.twitter.com/scPpQDGd4K

— The Athletic | Football (@TheAthleticFC) June 9, 2026

West Ham co-owner always been a sexual predator

The BBC and Times investigation into Sullivan’s alleged abuses unearthed allegations made by eight women. Each had spoken to the police about Sullivan’s inappropriate behaviour, but no charges have been levelled against the billionaire.

However, it isn’t hard to see merit in the victims’ claims. Sullivan’s resignation before the documentary aired arguably signals a guilty conscience and once again, an attempt by an abusive man to slink into the background to evade consequences for his lurid behaviour.

Once branded the ‘Sultan of Sleaze’, Sullivan grew his wealth through sex shops and pornography before becoming co-owner of West Ham in 2010.

The sexual misconduct allegations span decades, coming from women who were in their late teens and early 20s. They were aspiring young models seeking opportunities in the adult entertainment industry.

People, especially men, will undoubtedly try to blame the women for seeking work in an industry many view as exploitative and harmful. I disagree. Women cannot be blamed for pursuing opportunities to earn money.

It’s also incredibly hypocritical of men when they built, shaped and continue to profit from these industries.

West Ham and FA have some explaining to do

The former minister for victims and violence against women and girls, Alex Davies-Jones, expressed her horror at the allegations, while saying she wasn’t surprised by them.

The Labour MP also called for a review of how police handled disclosures made by potential victims of sexual abuse, raising fresh questions about whether authorities took those claims seriously enough.

Culture secretary, Lisa Nandy, joined this call.

She said:

If it is the case that an investigation concluded that there were sufficiently serious allegations to warrant a ban on contact with the youth and women’s teams, then the FA must explain this decision and why no further action was taken.

I expect a full and urgent explanation from the FA and West Ham as to how these incredibly serious allegations have been handled.

Apparently David Sullivan was known as “blowjob or no job”.

Wayne Couzens was known as “The Rapist”.

Peter Mandelson was known as “The Prince of Darkness”.

Maybe when someone tells you who they are via a ‘nickname’ you believe them.

— Alex Davies-Jones MP (@AlexDaviesJones) June 9, 2026

Survivor recalls frightening ‘audition’

An ex-model described the terror she felt during an ‘audition’ when she realised she was locked in the room with Sullivan.

He lured her with promises of securing national press, but said she would need to be “one of his special friends”.

She told the BBC:

[To Sullivan] If you think I’m going to sleep with you to get in the paper, you’ve got another thing coming. He looked very shocked as I said that. And then said, “What, not even a blowjob?”.

***

I go to the door and realise it’s locked. At that point, I was like, “Open the fucking door, open the fucking door now”.

This horrifying story will undoubtedly trigger traumatic experiences for many women and girls. It also reiterates the importance of a serious conversation about why society places the burden of safety on women and girls and ‘preventative measures’, rather than holding abusive men accountable.

The failing of the football industry

The FA and West Ham believed introducing preventative measures were sufficient — but can they honestly say they went far enough?

After all, Sullivan said:

I saw it as a meaningless restriction, as it didn’t impact on my work in any way, therefore I accepted it for a quiet life.

Some men are now attempting to make out that Sullivan, the alleged perpetrator, is a victim of defamation.

The @BBC would face serious legal action if they repeat disgraceful lies about David Sullivan. He is a brilliant self-made entrepreneur who has done a wonderful job for West Ham & does huge unsung work in the community. You have to question the motivation of any defamatory smears pic.twitter.com/sWfQhHtXVC

— William Storey (@richenergyceo) June 6, 2026

It’s time rich, powerful men face accountability

Back in 2008, this wannabe-Playboy billionaire lauded his behaviour.

I have given an awful lot of people a lot of pleasure and I have never hurt anyone.

Needless to say, plenty of the people named in the Epstein files would no doubt offer the same defence of their behaviour. But that’s part of the problem: powerful men always seem to have a ready-made excuse.

What accountability have these men actually faced? A few bad headlines? Some uncomfortable interviews? Maybe an angry opinion piece or two. Beyond that, very little. No serious consequences. No meaningful punishment.

The men responsible carry on with little disruption to their lives while women bear the consequences. Too often, those responsible evade accountability while survivors bear the consequences for years to come. When that pattern repeats itself time and again, talk of justice begins to ring hollow for many female victims.

Therefore, we hope to see greater pressure placed on the police. Authorities must start to intently listen to victims of sexual abuse and take their allegations seriously. For too long, there has been a reluctance to confront perpetrators head-on, often out of fear of causing offence or attracting controversy.

Victims deserve better than that. They deserve to be heard and they deserve a genuine effort to deliver justice.

Featured image via Justin Setterfield/ Getty Images

By Maddison Wheeldon

The US has bombed two reservoirs in Sirik, Iran, leaving over 20,000 people without access to fresh drinking water.

The strikes heavily damaged both reservoirs, which supply the Bemani and Kouhestak areas of Sirik town.

20,000 people in Iran’s Hormozgan province are now without drinking water after strikes reportedly destroyed water infrastructure in Sirik.

Two concrete storage tanks, 500 and 2,000 cubic meters, plus all mechanical installations supplying Kohstak city and 10 surrounding… pic.twitter.com/lpFSHT24ra

— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) June 10, 2026

Trump’s army illegally bombed around 20 sites, including the southern cities of Jask, Sirik, Goruk, Bandar Abbas and on Qeshm Island in the Strait of Hormuz.

This was supposedly ‘retaliation’ for Iran downing a US Apache Helicopter, which was patrolling the Strait of Hormuz. A US official said an Iranian drone collided with the Apache, causing it to crash.

Several US airstrikes were reported on the coastal cities of Sirik, Qeshm, Minab & Bandar Abbas.

In my opinion, this looks like a disproportionate attack, considering the Apache was violating Iranian airspace and the ceasefire. Iran will defo respond. https://t.co/aQOteTnPNr pic.twitter.com/vYe2Wpforw

— MenchOsint (@MenchOsint) June 9, 2026

But of course, the US was already striking targets near the Strait of Hormuz, and Israel never stopped bombing Lebanon, meaning Iran’s shooting down of the helicopter was merely self-defence.

Trump also said that Iran had:

taken too long to negotiate a deal that would have been great for them, now they will have to pay the price!!!

In response, Iran hit US targets across Gulf countries, including Jordan, Bahrain and Kuwait.

IRGC launched a retaliation attack around 2h30, targeting:

U.S. Fifth Fleet Base, Bahrain

U.S. Muwaffaq Salti Air Base, Jordan, F-35 Hangars and the command control center.

They also shot down an MQ-9 Reaper.

Drones & Ballistic Missiles were launched. https://t.co/t2n3cZJOxT pic.twitter.com/J04M3tQqo6

— MenchOsint (@MenchOsint) June 10, 2026

Iran face more war crimes from unaccountable US

Obviously, targeting civilian infrastructure such as reservoirs and water distribution centres is a war crime.

More war crimes against humanity and civilians by Israel & the United States https://t.co/3f0Iaw8rel

— Name (@NNAAM3E) June 10, 2026

The Geneva Conventions [1949] state that:

2. It is prohibited to attack, destroy, remove or render useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, such as foodstuffs, agricultural areas for the production of foodstuffs, crops, livestock, drinking water installations and supplies and irrigation works, for the specific purpose of denying them for their sustenance value to the civilian population or to the adverse Party, whatever the motive, whether in order to starve out civilians, to cause them to move away, or for any other motive.

But when has international law ever stopped the US?

Why the hell you target civilians and civilian infrastructure? This is a war crime any you Bas*dards know ithttps://t.co/TlakrVRtyL

— Majef F. (@RezaFroehlich) June 10, 2026

A local water company told Iranian state television that the destruction of the reservoirs had created a “major problem” for the region’s water supply network, as it had insufficient groundwater to replace the damaged reservoirs. It added:

Unfortunately, following this attack, 20,000 residents of the region have lost access to safe drinking water, and with temperatures ranging between 45 (113 degrees Fahrenheit) and 50 degrees Celsius, conditions have become extremely difficult and critical for local inhabitants.

Make no mistake – the US knows exactly what it’s doing, hitting vital water supplies during the hottest part of the year.

This is very bad. Water equals life in that part of the world. https://t.co/wU9T85GncG

— Clare K (@AucklandIsland) June 10, 2026

Of course, Iran would now be completely justified in hitting water plants that US troops or Israel rely on – seen as though Trump is fighting Netanyahu’s illegal battles for him.

Congratulations. Trump just justified Iran hitting all water desalination plants in the region to include ISRAEL’s.

— Mr. Gerald Wayne (@geraldwayne) June 10, 2026

Once again, this is US and Israeli colonialism on full display. What is even the point in international law anymore? Trump and Netanyahu get away with bombing schools, hospitals, and apartment blocks without a single consequence. So why would they think twice before bombing freshwater facilities?

The bottom line is, they don’t care about the lives of Iranians. And taking away access to fresh drinking water in 45-degree heat is just another tool to try to force Iran into submission.

Featured image via Tasnim News /X

By HG

In an interview with BBC Radio Manchester, Andy Burnham has made his thoughts clear on the topic of irregular migration. And by ‘clear’, we once again mean ‘less clear’.

The degree to which he was unclear is obvious in the fact that people are saying he agrees with Nigel Farage despite the fact that he also called for the creation of “safe routes”:

BREAKING | Burnham says he "agrees" with Farage on migration, pledging to detain + deport refugees

"We need to make greater use of detention … I do agree with what Farage is saying", said Burnham, adding Britain needs to "get back to a sense of order”

(Via @NovaraMedia) pic.twitter.com/WzYbaV3FZp

— Stats for Lefties (@LeftieStats) June 10, 2026

The UK desperately needs to introduce safe routes, as we’ve argued for some time. In now-trademark fashion, however, Burnham has given us just as much to worry about as to hope for.

Burnham bluster

Firstly, we should cover what safe routes are. As Amnesty explained:

A ‘safe and legal route’ to the UK means a journey that is formally approved by the UK Government. That generally means that Home Office immigration rules permit the journey without a visa; or the journey is made with a visa granted for the purpose of making it.

Amnesty additionally lays out the following four ‘truths’:

• TRUTH 1: The Government allows nobody to make a claim for asylum in the UK unless they are physically present in the UK
• TRUTH 2: It is impossible to come to the UK for the purpose of seeking asylum in any way permitted by the Government’s immigration rules
• TRUTH 3: The Government makes almost no safe and legal route available to any refugee other than someone from Ukraine
• TRUTH 4: Seeking asylum from persecution is lawful – refugees don’t need anyone’s permission to do so

Refugees can’t claim asylum until they get here, but they also can’t come here to claim asylum (not unless they’re Ukrainian, anyway). In other words, the UK is using its geographical nature as an island get out of our international responsibilities to protect displaced and persecuted people.

Will Burnham fix this?

As usual, we have no idea what he has planned. And as we’ve covered elsewhere:

• Burnham is silent on wealth taxes – not a promising sign from potential PM.
• Andy Burnham’s role with Iain Duncan Smith’s think tank just shows he’s more of the same.
• Burnham WON’T back proportional representation this parliament.
• Shapeshifting Burnham ditches trans rights to panic-grab Reform votes.
• Burnham slammed for saying he won’t renationalise Thames Water.

‘I do agree with Nigel Farage’

Getting to the interview itself, the following section is what people are reacting to (emphasis added):

What I am calling for is the reform of these Home Office contracts. I do agree with what [Nigel] Farage is saying. What we’ve got to do is get back to a sense of order.

There should be safe routes for people. What people don’t want to see is the chaos of the small boat crossings. I think the government is getting some order back into the system but there is definitely more to be done.

It’s not wrong to state that the introduction of safe routes would help end “the chaos of small boat crossings”. As the Green Party wrote in a policy paper on the matter:

If safe routes existed, people would take them. Instead, we have taken away their ability to arrive within permissible routes and thus force them to take more and more dangerous routes. Not only are we causing these risks and ensuring the growth of smuggling networks

The problem with what Burnham said is that the collection of sentences he wrangled together don’t make sense in proximity to one another.

He says ‘I agree with Farage’, and then he says ‘we’ve got get a sense of order’, and then he says ‘there should be safe routes’. This is confusing, because Farage definitely isn’t calling for the creation of safe routes. And if we’re being real, Farage loves the status quo of small boats, because he’s able to capitalise on it politically.

Really, then, who is Burnham trying to appeal to?

Left-wing voters will rightfully recoil at ‘I agree with Nigel Farage’. Some right-wing voters might nod along, but they won’t be nodding when the right-wing commentators start explaining what ‘safe routes’ are. At this point, these voters don’t want anyone coming here – safely or not.

A politician can present a moral and rational case for migration and asylum, or they can fearmonger. Burnham seems to be doing both.

‘Increased detention’

This is the other bit that people are taking Burnham to task over:

It’s this thing about control, isn’t it? It feels like the country isn’t functioning properly, running things properly and the small boats issue completely speaks to that. People want it to be dealt with. We do need to go further.

We need to make greater use of detention so that people who have got no basis for a claim are not actually admitted into the country.

Burnham apparently wants to create safe routes, which would mean asylum seekers are able to enter the country legally. He also wants to detain more asylum seekers – specifically the ones who continue to enter the country irregularly.

So how is he doing the maths on this?

Is he predicting that after we create safe routes, this will immediately be followed by an even greater influx of asylum seekers, and that said asylum seekers will opt to cross by boat despite the existence of safe routes?

Or is he planning to introduce so few safe routes that small boat crossings happen regardless?

Here we go again

As ever with Burnham, it seems like he’s trying to give everyone what they want. In other words, he’s doing radical centrism.

It’s similar to when he hints at nationalisation, but then you read his actual words, and you notice he’s promising “stronger public control” of private utilities – not public ownership.

We do hope he expands the UK’s available safe routes, anyway. We just don’t know which Burnham will show up if he becomes prime minister.

Maybe we need a safe route for the left-leaning version of Burnham to enter Downing Street?

Featured image via Anthony Devlin (Getty Images) / Anthony Devlin (Getty Images) / Carl Court (Getty Images)

By Willem Moore

Gwyneth Paltrow has joined fellow wealthy opportunists eager to support Israel in its settler-colonialist ambitions to exploit and profit off of stolen land taken from Palestinians.

Becoming the face of the 51 Park Herzliya luxury apartment settler-project in Israel, Zionist Paltrow has sought to upsell the new-built apartments with the creative direction of Israeli agency aptly named ‘Why Worry’.

However, Israel’s existence itself has demanded the displacement, death and destruction of the Palestinians who have been indigenous to the land for centuries. They are also currently waging a genocide against the indigenous population, with a clear stated aim to settle – steal – further territory.

Gwyneth Paltrow props up Zionist genocide

Paltrow’s move to make these illegal development projects more attractive to foreigners signals the scary fact that wealthy and powerful people simply do not care about the horrific human cost of Zionist occupation.

Moreover, this comes ahead of a planned event on Sunday 14th June called the ‘Great Israeli Real Estate Event’ which MP Richard Burgon has rightfully labelled “disgraceful”.

American actress gwyneth paltrow faces huge backlash after she promoted for $10M penthouses in Israel while Israel is committing genocide in Palestine pic.twitter.com/Pjcw4NsSTu

— LPC (@landpalestine) June 9, 2026

From one colonialist project to another

Paltrow filmed the advert in New York, showing the privilege of super-wealthy individuals in the US whilst grossly acting as if they are ‘normal’ – when the reality is most would never possibly be able to relate to her lifestyle. She then had a cheesy, and implausible, line when getting into a NY cab asking the driver to take her to Herzliya in Zionist ‘Israel.’

However, from its very inception, Israel has seen fit to murder, terrorise, displace and disavow Palestinians in order to establish its own ethnonationalist state. Dating back to the Nakba, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians have been forced out of their homes, one brutal way or another, for Zionists to build luxury properties on stolen land.

Moving into Lebanon, that bloodstained expansionist project to build “Greater Israel” is ongoing with little getting in its way.

Coincidentally, the US’ rise as a ‘global superpower’ is inseparable from a history of violent expansion, indigenous displacement, and mass destruction across the territory. This lends a pretty sinister and gross irony in Paltrow doing videos in one colonialist state to upsell properties in yet another settler, occupying state.

This latest development is built by Aviv Melisron and the name of its chosen creative agency speaks volumes – ‘Why Worry’. After all, it is increasingly clear that these elitists genuinely have no worries or concerns about the murderous projects they champion, empower and embolden.

Thus, ‘Why Worry’ about the deaths of hundreds of thousands if there’s a tidy profit to be made by Western capitalists like Paltrow.

UK hosting settler-colonialist real estate event in London

This sickening advertisement from Gwyneth Paltrow comes ahead of an event in London on Sunday which is seeking to sell homes in these illegal developments to pro-Zionist investors and potential homeowners. This, in turn, will increase British people’s involvement, and complicity, in the genocide continuing in Gaza and the settler-terrorism in the occupied territories.

Thankfully, Richard Burgon has taken the government to task over allowing such a bloodstained real estate event to go ahead in our capital city:

The ‘Great Israeli Real Estate Event’ is to be held in London this Sunday.

This disgraceful event will involve the sale of land stolen from Palestinians in illegal Israeli settlements.

Today, I called for the Government to ban this event. pic.twitter.com/QoFSFNIxCn

— Richard Burgon MP (@RichardBurgon) June 9, 2026

Burgon: “Ban this event selling off land illegally in Palestine”

Richard Burgon has consistently opposed Israel’s genocide in Gaza and consistently backed Palestinian claims to their stolen land, as settlement building in the West Bank continues to expand with absolute impunity.

Calling for stronger action by the government, he stated in the House of Commons:

Let’s just imagine, if this weekend in our capital city there was a great Russian real estate event, selling off Ukrainian land – Quite rightly, without hesitation, the Government would move to ban such an illegal event.

This weekend, in London, there is the great Israeli real estate event. Openly advertising the illegal sale of land in illegally occupied Palestinian territories. The government has rightly recognised the state of Palestine, surely given that, we should now move to ban this event selling off land illegally in Palestine in our capital city this weekend.

Foreign secretary Yvette Cooper responded by agreeing that these are illegal settlements, however refrains from any real action to block the event:

Well, we are pursuing this particular event and also if there are any cases where we find that there are breaches of UK law we will also pursue those issues as well.

But look, there is a wider issue here which is that nobody should be advertising, in the UK, illegal settlements. Nobody should be pursuing those illegal settlements. No businesses, no organisations should be getting involved in them and we have shown our willingness and determination to impose sanctions on organisations that do, just as we have set out today.

We will continue to do further sanctions, where we have the opportunity to do so, because support for illegal settlements is wrong.

Happy enough to ban left-wingers from UK, but never against Zionists

It is worth noting, though, that the government had no issue blocking entry of pro-Palestine Cenk Ugur and Hasan Piker so they couldn’t physically attend an Oxford Union lecture. Thankfully, the union welcomed them remotely, but the state had no trouble using its ‘might’ against advocates for Palestine.

Therefore, it stands to reason that Cooper could indeed do far more to actually stop this real estate event in London – it just requires a motivated political will to actually stand up to murderous Zionist Israel.

However, that political – or frankly, moral – will seems completely out of reach for this Israeli-captured and billionaire-corrupted former party of the working class.

Featured image via Getty/Theo Wargo

By Maddison Wheeldon

Labour MP Nadia Whittome has announced a motion to reject the Equalities and Human Rights Commission’s (EHRC) transphobic Code of Practice. Rachel Taylor MP, likewise of Labour, also gave a moving account of why she signed the motion.

Whittome and Taylor have also urged other MPs to sign the motion. To this end, trans rights campaign groups TransActual, Trans+ Solidarity Alliance, and Scottish Trans have created an email template for constituents to write to their MPs to urge them to sign.

Scottish Trans stated that, in just one week, over 1,200 people have already written to their representatives.

Transphobic code rejected

The EHRC’s draft guidance, as it currently stands, calls for service providers to exclude trans people from single-sex spaces reflecting their gender, and also often those of their sex assigned at birth. The government’s own impact assessment has acknowledged that it will likely harm trans and gender non-conforming individuals.

Whittome explained that her Early Day Motion (EDM), tabled 1 June, is:

This motion is currently the only available mechanism by which MPs can reject the EHRC’s Code of Practice; if debated and passed within the 40-day scrutiny window, it would prevent the EHRC from issuing the Code and bringing it into force. This is unfortunately unlikely, but it is important that as many MPs as possible sign the motion.

MPs already highlighted the obvious harms of the EHRC’s draft code in a parliamentary debate at the beginning of Pride month. Nevertheless, as Whittome highlighted, the government still looks highly likely to accept the guidance.

Early Day Motions have no set day for debate in Parliament. As such, most are never debated. However, EDMs do act as a mechanism to track MPs’ support for a particular cause.

The only current alternative is to allow the segregation of trans people in the UK to be enacted with apparent total support. As such, it’s crucial that trans-positive MPs (or even the transphobes who recognise that the code is unworkable) make their voices heard.

EHRC’s ‘hollow words of concern’

Regarding her decision to sign Whittome’s EDM, Rachel Taylor MP explained that:

I went into today’s Women and Equalities Committee to listen carefully to what the Chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) had to say about the recently tabled Code of Practice. After that session, I am deeply concerned that our national human rights body is worryingly complacent about a document that the government’s own impact assessment says puts transgender people at increased risk of harassment, violence and sexual abuse.

In particular, Taylor highlighted the EHRC chair’s “hollow words of concern” in answer to a question on trans people fleeing domestic violence. She continued:

During the session, the chair repeatedly struggled to answer questions about the glaring contradictions throughout the guidance. It is not good enough to simply defer to notions of ‘common sense’ at points where the guidance simply isn’t fit for purpose. It is blatantly obvious that the code is simply unworkable. And it is not credible to deny to enacting the Code will entrench a policing of harmful gender norms that many of us have fought so hard to overturn for many decades.

This gender policing hasn’t waited for the code to pass. Support groups have already reported that, following the Supreme Court’s ruling, gender non-conforming women have faced increased harassment in single-sex spaces.

‘The return of poisonous division’

Taylor also called out the ludicrous fact that the government’s impact assessment recognises the harm perpetrated by the code. She highlighted that the assessment:

repeatedly states that it is likely to increase community tension and conflict across our society, in an age that already feels defined by the return of poisonous division and open bigotry. The EHRC was created to be the champion of equality and tolerance, not a passive bystander to the marginalisation of vulnerable people.

Despite a change of leadership, it remains my view that the EHRC does not seem interested in advocating for and standing up for the rights of LGBT – and particularly transgender – people. As a lifelong campaigner for equality, that is not something I can accept.

The Women and Equalities Committee and the Joint Committee on Human Rights refused to endorse the current EHRC chair, Mary-Ann Stephenson. Both groups warned that she lacked experience in advocacy work beyond a narrow, and distinctly transphobic, focus on women’s rights.

Taylor also reiterated Whittome’s pessimism regarding the EDM itself, deeming it a “symbolic act”. Stating that she couldn’t sit by and allow the harmful code to pass without making her voice heard, she expressed frustration that:

signing this one is the only avenue available for making my views clear in what is clearly a deeply flawed process.

‘Stand in solidarity’

However, above and beyond that frustration, Taylor recognised her duty to stand up for a marginalised community:

I believe it is incumbent on me to stand in solidarity with transgender people across the country, and particularly my transgender constituents who have told me the real fear and distress they are feeling.

By Alex/Rose Cocker

It’s Carers Week, and unsurprisingly, the Labour government couldn’t care less.

Despite this being an easy way to prove that they at least superficially give a toss, neither the DWP nor the Department for Health and Social Care (DHSC) have posted about the week on social media.

Carers Week ignored this year

Just one department has posted about it, and it was to remind people to fill in a consultation about enabling unpaid carers to get back into work

Millions could re-enter the workforce if better workplace protections for unpaid carers were implemented. That’s why we’re consulting on possible changes to pay and leave entitlements. Have your say: https://t.co/81dhMf7enM pic.twitter.com/dpWr86WKkQ

— Department for Business and Trade (@biztradegovuk) June 9, 2026

The Department for Business and Trade posted a link to a consultation on employment rights for unpaid carers and parents of seriously ill children. Whilst this would make a difference, it ignores the fact that many carers can’t work because of their caring responsibilities.

DWP penalises informal carers

It’s also deeply hypocritical that the government wants to push more carers to be cogs in the capitalist machine when they’ve penalised so many for earning what they deem to be too much.

Carers have been battling for justice from the DWP for a long time. Those running the department still refuse to take accountability.

Just days after a scathing review into the government’s handling of the Carers Allowance scandal was published, a DWP senior civil servant published a blog post blaming carers for failing to report changes.

In an internal blog post seen by the Guardian, Neil Coulling said:

Incidentally what has been missed in all the [media] coverage is that this error (and hands up we made it and we will put it right) affects only a relatively small number of cases and wasn’t the cause of the original complaint. Because at the heart of the overpayment issues in [Carers Allowance] is a failure to report changes of circumstances.

It’s almost as if said carers are too busy looking after their loved ones and trying their hardest not to get into debt that they don’t have time to spend hours doing the DWP’s job for them.

The review found that some carers contemplated suicide due to the distress of being expected to pay back thousands of pounds that they never knew they owed.

Carers described how they were expected to work to strict DWP timelines but then made to wait excruciating lengths of time for responses. In some cases, they never received a reply at all.

One carer described it as “playing a game where only the other side knows the rules”.

The review especially highlighted how much senior figures within the DWP (such as Couling) were repeatedly warned of the issues in the system yet ignored them for more than a decade.

DWP hopes carers scandal will fizzle away

In a Work and Pensions Committee hearing, Liz Sayce, who headed up the inquiry, said the DWP was minimising the problem and deflecting the blame.

When asked about Couling’s comments, she said:

What you were hoping for from senior people at that point was to really share with colleagues across the department the seriousness of this – what has been learned, what is going to be put right. Not attempt to minimise or again, place a responsibility back on the carers, as if it was their fault.

Sayce also felt that senior members of staff had attempted to brush the issue under the carpet.

I felt that sometimes there was a kind of effort to almost minimise what had gone wrong to reassure staff that they hadn’t done anything. And actually that’s the wrong thing to do. As a leader in such a circumstance what you need to do, I think, is to own the problem, explain why the system wasn’t right.

When asked by the Committee to explain itself, the DWP floundered. Peter Schofield, permanent secretary of the DWP, waffled on so much that Lib Dem Steve Darling accused him of talking “blancmange”.

Darling said:

You’ve given me a lot of blancmange that I’m finding difficult to nail to the ceiling what clear evidence of management change is there, and I’m concerned that you’re not able to give me any.

Laughably, Schofield’s response claimed the DWP always fixed its mistakes.

We’ve got a great track record of putting things right when things go wrong. This is a department that when it knows we have to get things right we put it right.

DWP works exactly how the government wants

And despite all this, the DWP is still chasing carers over supposedly unpaid bills. The Canary reported the situation is so bad that another inquiry could be looming.

However, as we pointed out, the DWP is doing exactly what the government told it to.

Repeatedly, successive governments have tasked the DWP with reducing benefits payments and rooting out largely imaginary ‘fraud’. They don’t get to feign shock that the DWP is hounding innocent people. That’s the department’s whole job – the same disgraceful job the government tasked them with.

At the end of the day, no amount of sanctimonious nothing sentiments from the government will make up for the fact that they enable a department whose primary focus is to hound vulnerable people and instead of supporting them, work to actively make their lives worse.

Featured image via Naomi Baker/ Getty Images

By Rachel Charlton-Dailey

Activists occupied the Gherkin’s foyer in protest against insurance company Swiss Re’s refusal to rule out liquefied natural gas projects in the Coral Triangle on international Coral Triangle Day.

Protesters chanted: “Protect our oceans, protect our future!” and “Swiss Re, you can’t hide, don’t insure this ecocide!” The Coral Triangle spans much of South East Asia, including Indonesia, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, the Philippines, the Solomon Islands and Timor-Leste.

When the protesters tried to deliver a letter to Swiss Re, they were refused. Security guards man-handled young people and dragged a scientist participating in the protest to the revolving door, where he lay between the panels blocking the entrance. City of London Police attended but made no arrests.

Protect the Coral Triangle

Lily, 17, a student from Generation 1.5, said:

We are demanding Swiss Re rules out the insuring of new oil and gas projects in the Coral Triangle. Our futures depend on scaling down fossil fuels, not more expansion, and biodiverse regions like the Coral Triangle have to be protected.

Insurers have the power to stop extractive and destructive projects like this by withdrawing support, but they need to be willing to act.

The protest follows an open letter from over 70 organisations, calling on insurance companies to:

• Rule out insuring gas expansion into the Coral Triangle.
• Exclude fossil gas projects in high-biodiversity and protected areas.
• Stop insuring fossil gas expansion globally.
• Support a just and secure energy transition.
• Respect human rights and Indigenous sovereignty as a condition of insurance coverage.

The Coral Triangle is home to 76% of the world’s coral species, critical tuna spawning grounds and vast mangrove carbon sinks. It supports over 360 million people’s livelihoods. Fossil fuel expansion there would increase threats of oil spills and pollution.

This could devastate critical coral reef ecosystems that are essential for global food security, water security and geopolitical stability, according to the UK government’s report on ecosystems collapse and national security threats.

Shana Sullivan, a PhD student and spokesperson for the student protest group No New Workers, added:

As students we pledge to boycott careers in any such insurance or financial companies that prop up the fossil fuel or arms industries, while calling on our peers to do the same, building pressure on the insurance sector to withdraw their support for extractive, ecocidal and imperialist projects wiping out communities and accelerating climate breakdown.

Insurance sector is worried

Already the insurance sector is showing alarm at student opposition to destructive underwriting practices. Just 13% of students say they’ll ever consider a career in insurance, a historic low. Student protests will “send shivers through the insurance sector”, according to Emerging Risks trade commentary.

No New Workers is a youth-led grassroots campaign targeting the industries enabling new fossil fuels and weapons of war. Students, graduates and young people are promising no new workers for these industries until they divest from ecocide and genocide.

Generation 1.5 is a youth climate justice action group. It aims to build a community of young people willing to organise and take action to make our voices and the ones of marginalised and oppressed groups heard, and to educate about the root causes and injustices surrounding the climate crisis.

Featured image supplied

By The Canary

A conference held by a US-Israel lobby group has laughed uproariously at the memory of an Israeli terrorist attack that killed and maimed thousands, including children.

US politician calls not shaking Netanyahu’s hand ‘wild’

Lobby-funded senator, John Fetterman, was speaking to the American Jewish Committee, a hardcore Zionist, pro-genocide group.

He told listeners that the idea of someone not shaking the hand of wanted war criminal, Benjamin Netanyahu, was “wild”.

But blowing up kids and old people? “I love it.” (Cue hilarity from the AJC audience.)

Zionism is racism. Israel is terrorism.

Featured image via Chip Somodevilla/ Getty Images

By Skwawkbox

The US has bombed 20 locations in Iran after it shot down an ‘Apache’ helicopter set up for electronic warfare in the Hormuz Strait.

Trump has pulled in the AH-64 Apache from American facilities worldwide for use in attacks on Iran.

US surveillance and attack

The US military had originally claimed that a technical fault caused the crash. The helicopter’s crew survived and was picked up from the sea.

The ‘Longbow’ variant of the apache is set up for surveillance and for support of special forces. Former US special forces officer, Lt Col Antony Aguilar, described it as hard to shoot down and said that similar aircraft had been used a week earlier to attack Iranian civilian vessels.

Trump attacked Iran for successfully defending itself and has described the escalated aggression as “defensive”.

Featured image via the Canary

By Skwawkbox

According to the Guardian’s Jessica Elgot, voters in Makerfield are baffled by a decision from the Reform candidate. The candidate in question is Robert Kenyon, and the decision he made is to not apologise for the comments he made online:

Voters who had noticed Kenyon’s online comments (almost everyone was aware) were slightly baffled he hadn’t apologised. Feel a difference here between “never back down” attitude of online debate versus what people expect in real life.

— Jessica Elgot (@jessicaelgot) June 9, 2026

Kenyon has a track record of derogatory comments

When it comes to Kenyon’s online comments, there are many which may have caused offence. As the Canary has reported, these comments include the following on women’s rights:

I’d hazard a guess that the majority [of abortions] are for vanity purposes like unwanted pregnancies.

On the question of whether this makes him a sexist, the answer is Kenyon doesn’t care, because he’s also said:

I’m sexist, sorry I am.

While Kenyon technically said “sorry” here, he’s steadfastly refused to apologise since.

Kenyon also said:

Reproductive rights? Women’s rights? They can dress it up all they want, they are deciding to kill a baby inside the womb…What they mean is they want to shag anyone they want and if they get caught they get a second chance and treat it [sic] as a secondary last chance form of contraception. They ain’t kidding anyone.

Kenyon sells himself as a straight talker, but really he’s just another Billy big-bollocks who wants to import Yank-style Christo-fascist politics to the UK.

Oh, and he’s also a coward because while it’s true he won’t apologise for his words, he won’t stand by them either.

He literally went for ‘how can I hate women, when my mum was a woman?’ https://t.co/6oTZDGwRKh

— Willem Moore (@willem_moore_uk) June 4, 2026

Honestly, it’s a bit odd that he’s a plumber given how much time he’s spent sitting on fences in regard to his own opinions.

Reform UK’s Robert Kenyon on #BBCQuestionTime:

Audience: “I’d rather have a career politician than a plumber who’s a sexist.”

“You described yourself as a sexist.”

Kenyon: “Allegedly.”

Then refuses to apologise to Carol Vorderman after agreeing in 2021 that a creep wanting… pic.twitter.com/gtDR4WqgtC

— King (@King0243_PJC) June 5, 2026

How is this any different to the careerist politicians who refuse to answer questions? The careerist politicians Reform is supposedly here to replace?

On the the Vorderman comments, the Guardian reported:

In 2021, Kenyon responded to a social media post about [Carol] Vorderman in which another user wrote: “My god I’d love to smell and lick your arsehole”, by saying: “He’s only saying what we’re all thinking”.

You’d think this would be an easy one to apologise for, but Kenyon flat-out refused to do so. Adding insult to injury, he attacked Vorderman for speaking out, saying:

There’s been a lot of noise about this indirect, sort of vulgar tweet that I’ve made, but I’ve not heard much about Carol’s thoughts on Labour not having the grooming gangs inquiry last year or what she thinks about biological males being allowed into single sex spaces.

Kenyon also claimed women “can’t drive“, which is ironic in the sense that he’s driving women to not vote for him.

It doesn’t end with sexism either.

Rob Kenyon has still not apologised for his homophobic or sexist comments.#Makerfield pic.twitter.com/zg91qJf7eT

— Reform Party UK Exposed (@reformexposed) June 9, 2026

The more they see of him, the less they want

Elgot also observed the following:

Spent Monday in parts of Ashton and Orrell where Labour are targeting around 16% still undecided voters in Makerfield by-election.

Some observations

– Many who voted Reform only weeks ago are prepared to vote for Burnham. There is a *big* gender divide and QT was a big factor

— Jessica Elgot (@jessicaelgot) June 9, 2026

Many of the clips above are from Kenyon’s Question Time appearance. It was there that he was asked to apologise for his past sexism, and it was there that he refused to do so.

Following Kenyon’s appearance, the Canary‘s Maddison Wheeldon wrote:

Rather than recognising why people took issue with the Reform candidate’s remarks or offering any meaningful apology, Kenyon has chosen to dispute the criticism itself. That approach has only deepened concerns about his dangerous judgment.

When someone seeks influence and authority, their willingness to listen to criticism and reflect on their mistakes matters just as much as the views they express.

Given all this, it’s unsurprising women don’t see Reform as having their interests in mind. What’s disappointing is that many men seemingly don’t care.

As the vast majority of these men were no doubt born of woman, this puts to bed the idea that lads can’t be sexist if they have mothers.

Featured image via Christopher Furlong/ Getty Images

By Willem Moore

GMB, Unison and Unite have penned a joint letter to education secretary Bridget Phillipson MP. It expresses:

profound concern regarding the current direction and lack of meaningful progress within the School Support Staff Negotiating Body (SSSNB).

Together the unions represent more than 500,000 school workers. General secretaries Gary Smith, Andrea Egan and Sharon Graham warn against the ‘continued expansion of academisation’. And they say unless things change:

we will have no option but to escalate our response publicly and industrially.

The letter to the education secretary says:

The joint trade unions campaigned extensively over many years to re-establish the SSSNB.

We did so in good faith because we knew it was our best and long overdue opportunity to address the deep-rooted inequalities, fragmentation, and inconsistency experienced by school support staff across England.

However, the pace and substance of negotiations to date are now placing that confidence at serious risk.

At the recent SSSNB Working Group meeting on 20 May 2026, it was extremely disappointing to be informed that the remit for the SSSNB in its first year would be very limited.

The continued expansion of academy trust structures, in the absence of a coherent national framework for school support staff, risks accelerating workforce fragmentation.

GMB, UNISON and UNITE remain committed to constructive engagement and would strongly prefer to resolve these issues through meaningful progress and genuine partnership with government.

However, the current trajectory is rapidly exhausting the goodwill that existed when the SSSNB was re-established.

Should meaningful progress continue to be absent, we will have no option but to escalate our response publicly and industrially, including at upcoming conferences over the summer period.

We are therefore urging government to treat this moment with the seriousness it requires and to work with us urgently to restore confidence in the process before further damage is done.

Featured image via Ian Forsyth / Getty Images

By The Canary

When FIFA decided to expand the World Cup to 48 teams for the first time in history, it seemed like a new victory for the idea of inclusivity that the world’s most popular sport has long championed.

More countries will get the chance to appear on football’s biggest stage. Continents that previously suffered from a lack of places will find themselves more widely represented and new fans will live the long-awaited World Cup dream.

But ahead of the 2026 edition, a striking paradox has emerged that is making itself felt with increasing force. whilst the tournament’s doors have opened wider to national teams, they seem narrower than ever for many fans.

World Cup of the People to World Cup of the Market

For many decades, the World Cup has been more than just a football tournament; it has been a global event where cultures and peoples come together in the stands before the pitch. Fans from all over the world have been an integral part of the tournament’s identity, creating the colours, chants and stories that remain in the memory longer than some of the matches themselves.

But the upcoming edition reflects a different reality. With the growing reliance on luxury hospitality packages, variable ticket pricing and rising travel and accommodation costs, many are wondering whether the tournament is gradually shifting from a global festival for the masses to a sporting and commercial product aimed more at those who can afford its exorbitant costs.

The tournament has expanded in sporting terms, but it has become more selective economically.

More teams but less fans able to attend

From a sporting perspective, the 48-team format represents an unprecedented historic step. The tournament will see a greater number of nations, players and fans from different continents taking part, thereby boosting the game’s global reach.

However, the picture looks different off the pitch.

A fan dreaming of following their national team in North America faces not only the cost of the ticket, but a whole range of expenses, starting with flights and extending to hotels, transport, food, insurance and other travel requirements.

And herein lies the greatest paradox in the history of the modern tournament: whilst qualifying for the World Cup has become easier for national teams, it has become more difficult for many fans.

Let’s compare Qatar 2022 and Russia 2018

At World Cup Russia 2018, fans benefited from relatively lower accommodation and travel costs compared to major Western markets.

In Qatar, in 2022, despite the widespread controversy that preceded the tournament, the country’s compact geography allowed fans to attend more than one match a day and significantly reduced the cost of domestic travel.

As for the 2026 World Cup, the picture is completely different.

The tournament will be held across 16 cities in the US, Canada and Mexico, with huge distances between  some stadiums. Fans may find themselves having to fly more than once just to follow a single team during the group stage.

Thus, the problem is not just the ticket price but the cost of the entire World Cup experience.

Tickets and costs…’A dream that turns into a budget’

At the 2026 World Cup, tickets are no longer the only obstacle facing fans; they have become part of a complex pricing system that makes getting into the stands a real financial challenge.

Reports suggest that ticket prices in some categories have risen significantly compared to previous tournaments, with a variable pricing system in place that makes major matches more expensive as demand increases.

However, the biggest burden lies not in the ticket price alone but in the ‘full experience’ of the World Cup. Fans will face a series of mounting costs: hotels in cities that are among the most expensive in the world during peak season, domestic flights between geographically distant cities, and high daily expenses due to differences in the cost of living.

When these factors are combined, a trip to watch the tournament could turn into a financial undertaking beyond the means of many of the traditional fans who have shaped the history of the World Cup.

Most expensive and resource-intensive tournament

The 2026 World Cup is likely to be the largest in terms of expenditure, logistics and environmental emissions.

With the number of matches increased to 104 and the number of host cities rising to 16 across three different countries, the tournament will see unprecedented travel by teams, fans, media and sponsors.

This massive expansion has prompted a number of environmental studies to warn that the 2026 tournament could have the highest carbon footprint in World Cup history, at a time when global sporting bodies are championing sustainability and environmental conservation.

Thus, the expansion of sport is shifting from an organisational achievement to a source of both economic and environmental controversy.

Are World Cup stands losing their spirit?

This is perhaps the most sensitive question of all. The value of the World Cup has never lain solely in the number of matches or the scale of revenue, but in the fans who have given the tournament its unique spirit. Fans who have saved for years to make the journey, who have waved their national flags in the stands, and who have created unforgettable moments that have become part of the game’s history.

However, many fear that the stands will gradually become spaces that are less representative of the average fan and more dominated by companies, major sponsors and holders of exclusive rights.

At that point, the question will no longer be about the number of participating teams or the number of matches, but about the very identity of the tournament itself.

The paradox of the new era

The 2026 World Cup will go down in history as the biggest, most expansive and richest edition in the tournament’s history, which dates back to 1930. But it also faces questions that have never before been raised with such intensity.

Whilst FIFA has succeeded in expanding the global reach of football, it is still required to prove that this expansion does not necessarily mean excluding the fans who have built the game’s popularity across generations.

The World Cup is accessible to more countries than ever before, but the road to the stands is longer and more expensive than ever too.

And therein lies the paradox that perhaps sums up the whole story of the 2026 World Cup: a tournament that is more global on paper, but less accessible to everyone in reality.

Featured image via Luke Hales/ Getty Images

By Alaa Shamali

In football, a goalkeeper does not always need to lift the trophy to secure his place in World Cup history. Some have built their legacy by enduring on the world’s biggest football stage, whilst others have forged their legend by keeping a clean sheet against their opponents.

Throughout the history of the World Cup, two distinct paths to immortality have emerged among goalkeepers; the first is measured by the number of matches a goalkeeper has played, and the second by the number of clean sheets he has kept.

World Cup: Hugo Lloris sits top of record books

Over the course of four World Cup appearances, Frenchman Hugo Lloris has become a symbol of consistency and reliability. The goalkeeper, who led his country to the 2018 title and the 2022 final, has become the most-capped goalkeeper in the tournament’s history with 20 appearances.

Lloris’s achievement was no mean feat, as he surpassed names that have been synonymous with World Cup history for decades, foremost among them Germany’s Manuel Neuer (19 appearances), followed by Sepp Maier and Taffarel (18 appearances each).

These figures reflect a value distinct from tournaments and titles; they tell the story of a goalkeeper who has managed to maintain his place among the elite for many years, across successive generations of players and managers.

Goalkeepers with the most World Cup appearances

• Hugo Lloris – France – 20 matches
• Manuel Neuer – Germany – 19 appearances
• Sepp Maier – West Germany – 18 appearances
• Taffarel – Brazil – 18 appearances
• Dino Zoff – Italy – 17 appearances
• Peter Shilton – England – 17 appearances
• Fabien Barthez – France – 17 appearances
• Iker Casillas – Spain – 17 appearances
• Fernando Muslera – Uruguay – 16 appearances
• Thibaut Courtois – Belgium – 15 appearances
• Gilmar – Brazil – 14 appearances
• Emerson Leão – Brazil – 14 appearances
• Gianluigi Buffon – Italy – 14 appearances
• Jan Youngbloed – Netherlands – 12 matches

Barthez and Shilton: The kings of clean sheets

Whilst Lloris may have won the battle of endurance, France’s Fabien Barthez and England’s Peter Shilton share the top spot on the list of goalkeepers with the most clean sheets.

Both kept 10 clean sheets at the World Cup, the highest tally in the tournament’s history, setting the standard for resilience under pressure in the biggest competitions.

Just behind the duo is Dutchman Jan Jongbloed, with eight clean sheets from just 12 matches – the best success rate among top goalkeepers – alongside prominent names such as Taffarel, Sepp Maier, Emerson Leão and Hugo Lloris.

Clean sheets are not merely a defensive statistic; they often represent the difference between an early exit and progression to the knockout stages, which explains why most of those with such records feature among the greatest goalkeepers in the history of the game.

Goalkeepers with the most clean sheets

• Fabien Barthez – France – 17 matches – 10 clean sheets
• Peter Shilton – England – 17 matches – 10 clean sheets
• Jan Jongbloed – Netherlands – 12 matches – 8 clean sheets
• Emerson Liao – Brazil – 14 matches – 8 clean sheets
• Sepp Maier – West Germany – 18 matches – 8 clean sheets
• Taffarel – Brazil – 18 matches – 8 clean sheets
• Hugo Lloris – France – 20 matches – 8 clean sheets
• Gilmar – Brazil – 14 matches – 7 clean sheets
• Thibaut Courtois – Belgium – 15 matches – 7 clean sheets
• Fernando Muslera – Uruguay – 16 appearances – 7 clean sheets
• Iker Casillas – Spain – 17 matches – 7 clean sheets
• Manuel Neuer – Germany – 19 matches – 7 clean sheets

Two sides to goalkeeping greatness

Although the criteria differ, some names have managed to combine both. Hugo Lloris not only holds the record for the number of appearances, but also ranks among the goalkeepers with the most clean sheets. The same applies to Manuel Neuer, Taffarel and Sepp Maier.

Whilst the record of appearances tells the story of staying at the top, the list of clean sheets tells the story of the ability to keep the dream alive. Between these two stories lies the legacy of the goalkeepers who have left their mark on World Cup history – not through the goals they scored, but through the goals they prevented.

Featured image via Agustin Cuevas / Getty Images

By Alaa Shamali

Students from the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) have published a document criticising the university’s greenwashing of corporate capitalism at LSE Festival 2026.

The document, seen first by the Canary, takes aim at how the university’s stated ethos diverges from its material investments and corporate practices. This alternative programme was compiled by LSE Students for Justice in Palestine.

It comes in response to LSE’s school-wide festival, beginning 15 June, which will gather economists, academics, policy ministers, journalists, and scientists to speak about the climate crisis, green finance, and ecological governance.

However, student and staff activist researchers in 2024 and 2025 revealed how LSE’s own investment practices contradict its charitable goals and ESG standards.

This year, students write:

…while the institution performs planetary concern on its stages, it holds more than £86 million in investments across the very industries responsible for the climate catastrophe.

As you attend this festival, remember that LSE does not put its money where its mouth is.

LSE’s money isn’t where its mouth is

In May 2024, LSESU’s Palestine Society published Assets in Apartheid, a forensic analysis of LSE’s multi-million pound endowment. In June 2025, it published Stakes in Settler Colonialism, a 228-page update.

The reports’ cumulative findings are clear. LSE holds more than £86 million in companies profiting from the extraction and/or distribution of fossil fuels, including BP (£2.05 million ), Enel (£1.98 million), and Shell (£1.11 million).

Its investment advisor, JP Morgan Chase, is the world’s most prolific financier of fossil fuels, according to the 2025 Banking on Climate Chaos: Fossil Fuel Finance Report. This is who LSE trusts with its money.

Beyond fossil fuels, LSE has investments worth over £71 million in companies profiting from the manufacture and/or proliferation of arms as well as the funding of nuclear weapons.

The university also has at least £72 million in companies profiting from the genocide in Gaza. Those companies are:

• Supplying the Israeli military operating in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT)
• Involved in illegal settlement activities
• Funding the occupation of Palestine

The report explains that:

These are not abstract figures. Every barrel pumped, every missile shipped, and every settlement financed by a company in this portfolio is a decision that LSE’s Finance and Estates Committee has taken, and refuses to reverse.

The students at LSE allege that for the university, “money is more important than lives”.

The university is happily staging a festival about saving the planet while bankrolling its destruction. In doing so, it uses the spectacle of concern to obscure its own material role in ecological breakdown and genocide.

Polluters are the programme

LSE has organised various high-profile speakers, all with loft speech titles, but the students aren’t convinced. Here’s an example from the greenwashing programme:

Mon 15 June – The Politics of Climate Change

This is a panel on the “green backlash” and climate rollbacks in recent years. However, students say:

LSE is its own case study: students voted for divestment in 2024, and again in 2026. Management declined to act both times.

The panels are included, but not limited to, ‘Political Economy Analysis for Accelerating the Green Transition,’ ‘How the Right Laws Can Save the Planet,’ and ‘Can We Tackle Climate Change Without Deepening Inequality?’

And, the report authors promise to tackle the problem of opposition from management:

LSE’s administration and its own student body are divided by exactly this failure of cooperation. 89% of students voted for divestment. Management refused. Cooperation, apparently, means something different when the institution is on one side and its students on the other.

Gross institutional hypocrisy on BP

As the students state:

Oil and education don’t mix.

They’re keen to underscore the complicity of BP, to whom LSE directs many millions of pounds. BP is complicit in both ecocide and the Gaza genocide.

LSE has been here before. In 1988, following a two-week student occupation of Connaught House, LSE divested from all 26 of its holdings in companies complicit in South African apartheid, a stake worth £3 million that included investments in BP. It has been done, and can be done again.

However, two years later, in 1990, LSE accepted £1.25 million from BP to establish the BP Centennial Professorship Scheme, designed, in LSE’s own words, to “contribute to the internal education programme of BP and to develop contacts between the School and BP”.

Under this scheme, LSE lends BP the grammar of sustainability, development, and progress. This is the precise language BP uses to greenwash its complicity in climate breakdown whilst the planet burns.

The report authors explain that:

Greenwashing is the practice of deploying the language of environmental responsibility to obscure the reality of environmental harm. It does not require lying. It requires only that the performance of concern be loud enough, and public enough, to crowd out scrutiny of the underlying conduct.

In June 2024, the LSE Student Union held a referendum on divestment from fossil fuels and arms producers. With record turnout, 89% of students voted in favour. In February 2026, the referendum was renewed with similarly overwhelming support.

Both times, LSE management declined to listen to its student body, citing “fiduciary duties”. But, the students allege fiduciary duty is not the neutral, technical constraint that management presents it as. It is a choice about whose interests count and over what timescale.

How to actually save the planet

Students have listed a number of suggestions for LSE to take up:

1. Full divestment from all holdings in fossil fuel companies, and from the asset managers and advisors financing their expansion.

2. Immediate divestment from all companies identified in Assets in Apartheid and Stakes in Settler Colonialism as complicit in crimes against the Palestinian people.

3. Full transparency of LSE’s portfolio. Easy access to view how much money is invested and in which companies.

4. Democratic oversight of the endowment. Students and staff must have binding participation in investment decisions.

5. End the BP Centennial Professorship and all partnerships with BP and other fossil fuel giants.

Until these demands are met, every “How to Save the Planet” panel is an alibi for inaction.

Featured image via the Canary

By Cameron Baillie

Tommy Robinson has, once again, been promoting the far-right uprisings spreading across the UK. He tweeted:

The whole of the United Kingdom is hitting the streets tonight at 7pm following yet another invader attack on our people.

It's time pic.twitter.com/tscckc9ceK

— Tommy Robinson (@TRobinsonNewEra) June 9, 2026

Tommy Robinson: from Russia with hate

Following Robinson’s calls to rise up, riots erupted in Belfast. The city was earlier the scene of an attempted murder involving a Sudanese man. And once again, we saw the right cynically using a horrific crime to drive racial tensions:

Crime is now being viewed through an entirely racialised lens – but only when the perpetrators aren't white.

When Chas Corrigan stabbed a Saudi student to death, or Paul Doyle mowed down Liverpool fans, white people didn't have to fear being a target of collective retaliation.

— Ash Sarkar (@AyoCaesar) June 10, 2026

Robinson revelled in the violent acts which followed his call to action:

Belfast is out. pic.twitter.com/nHZ7GURRRA

— Tommy Robinson (@TRobinsonNewEra) June 9, 2026

Belfast is burning.

Britain's politicians have failed us all. pic.twitter.com/MDqnFKoQCB

— Tommy Robinson (@TRobinsonNewEra) June 9, 2026

Roads blocked by burning vehicles in Northern Ireland. pic.twitter.com/N2MXRnHerI

— Tommy Robinson (@TRobinsonNewEra) June 9, 2026

Suspected HMO's are being burned out across Northern Ireland following the attempted beheading of a man by a Sudanese invader last night. pic.twitter.com/JTMYkBuSl7

— Tommy Robinson (@TRobinsonNewEra) June 9, 2026

As the sun goes down over Northern Ireland, homes and vehicles burn in Belfast. pic.twitter.com/68lGMT9f6Q

— Tommy Robinson (@TRobinsonNewEra) June 9, 2026

Robinson has claimed refugees pose a risk to British women. Meanwhile, he’s telling us the solution to this is to elect the notorious rapist Conor McGregor:

Lead your people Conor.

It's the only way https://t.co/mUdcXrCCQH

— Tommy Robinson (@TRobinsonNewEra) June 9, 2026

A mockery

Robinson mocked the Black residents of Belfast whose houses were burned down:

https://t.co/UxNXqDKwjL pic.twitter.com/eZcZblhCIb

— Tommy Robinson (@TRobinsonNewEra) June 10, 2026

In the above, Robinson is referencing the killing of Henry Nowak. On 2 June, the Canary’s Rose Cocker reported on another far-right agitator – Nigel Farage – who used the murder of Nowak to push for “pure, cold rage” – a call that white rioters took up. As Cocker reported, murderer Vickrum Digwa:

wrongfully claimed that he had been the victim of a racialised assault, and responding officers attempted to arrest Nowak as he lay dying. Body-cam footage shows Nowak pleading with officers that he had been stabbed, and he couldn’t breathe. At one point, an officer replied “I don’t think you have, mate.”

Henry Nowak’s parents stated clearly that they didn’t want their son’s murder to be used to stir up hatred and division. Instead, they called for knife crime to be treated as a national emergency.

By suggesting all people of colour should be blamed for the Henry Nowak case, Robinson is promoting ‘collective punishment‘ – an act which is considered to be a war crime and a grave violation of human rights.

This is not normal.

Men like Robinson are dragging us back to the pre-WWII status quo, and we cannot allow them to succeed.

The Musk connection

On 9 June, we reported that Robinson was in Russia. Notably, Robinson met with Elon Musk’s father, Errol. As Elon despises his father and has very thin skin, we predicted this would lead to a split between Elon and Robinson. As it turns out, however, it seems Elon cares more about pushing hatred than avoiding humiliation:

Only by protesting REPEATEDLY and LOUDLY will there be any change!! https://t.co/73GDcLLFwv

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 9, 2026

We say ‘avoiding humiliation’ because Errol Musk is a man who Elon himself describes as “evil”. Despite this, he passively watched on as his tormentor hung out with his minion. Errol is also a man who married his own stepdaughter – Elon’s stepsister – and who allegedly abused several of the Tesla billionaire’s siblings.

Musk is a powerful ally for the British far-right to have, anyway. He’s been pushing their message for years at this point, and surprise, surprise; we now have yearly white riots erupting off the words of social media Goebbels like Robinson.

They're itching for a civil war. A forieng billionaire is trying to use a thug to start it. pic.twitter.com/WsuV8455Wx

— Mukhtar (@I_amMukhtar) June 9, 2026

Pogroms

These white riots weren’t just displays of street violence, either. As Robert Freeman reported for the Canary:

Racist thugs have carried out a wave of pogroms in Belfast and nearby towns, setting fire to homes belonging to people of colour. The rioters also attacked businesses that they thought were the property of ‘foreigners’, ignited vehicles, and blocked roads.

A pastor helping those in houses targeted tonight in Belfast says people were being put out of their homes “because they're black”

He says members of his church “who have been with us for 20 years..had their house attacked, windows smashed, houses beside them burned” pic.twitter.com/nYwrVPx8Aa

— Taj Ali (@Taj_Ali1) June 9, 2026

For those who are unfamiliar, a ‘pogrom‘ is “an act of organized cruel behaviour or killing that is done to a large group of people because of their race or religion” (Cambridge Dictionary). The word is most commonly applied to the waves of violence against European Jews in the 20th century, with the most famous example being the Nazi’s Kristallnacht.

Now, we’re once again seeing pogroms in the Western hemisphere; most often against Muslims, but increasingly affecting anyone whose skin tone doesn’t reflect that of far-right rabble rousers like Tommy Robinson.

Just home from dealing with the consequences of tonight's lawlessness.

Perhaps some of the English right wing influencers and local politicians enthusing about these protests would explain to children I met why they have no beds to sleep in tonight.

Utterly disgusted.

— Matthew O'Toole (@MatthewOToole2) June 10, 2026

And make no mistake, Robinson is directly dehumanising the people who now face mob violence. Here he is describing foreign people as “savages”:

Stop importing the fuckers then, send them back!!!

Stop dumping these third world savages into our communities!!!

Enough of your performative politics you wanker!!!#EnoughIsEnough@Keir_Starmer https://t.co/GW34YHAOHa

— Tommy Robinson (@TRobinsonNewEra) June 9, 2026

And here he was saying the same thing a few months ago:

Independent journalist @ActivePatriotUK has been arrested for social media posts AGAIN!

The nation is literally being invaded by third world savages and the police are going after those who expose it!
pic.twitter.com/2TMLm6tXY1

— Tommy Robinson (@TRobinsonNewEra) March 28, 2026

It’s not condoning the actions of the alleged attempted-murderer to say we shouldn’t be referring to entire groups of people as “savages”.

After all, if we were to collectively denigrate groups for the actions of individuals, the scenes in Belfast would suggest all white people are ‘savages’, wouldn’t they?

Featured image via Mario Tama (Getty Images) / Charles McQuillan (Getty Images)

By Willem Moore

MP Rebecca Long-Bailey recently spoke at the conference for the Bakers, Food and Allied Workers Union and delivered a fierce rebuke to what the Labour Party has become under Keir Starmer.

Referring to the murkiness of Peter Mandelson’s appointment, and the way in which the party has forgotten working class people, Long-Bailey insisted the party must remember and revive its trade union values.

Her calls coincide with millionaire Nigel Farage telling unions to “ditch Labour” and affiliate with his party which only truly seeks to benefit its vested interests — the super-rich.

These are the highlights from her address…

Long-Bailey’s wish is ‘more compassion, more courage, more unity’

During her conference speech, Long-Bailey discussed the struggle which ordinary people are living in, and how vulnerable our communities are to divisive parties like Farage’s racist Reform UK.

She said:

We’re in really unstable and worrying political times, and we’re gathering in a moment that demands so much from all of us.

More compassion, more courage and more unity because in difficult economic times — when families are struggling to get by, when wages are stagnant, rents are soaring and people are anxious about their futures — it’s our communities who feel the strain most sharply.

And in those moments of hardship the far right tries to seep into the cracks of society, whispering division, sowing hatred, pushing the poisonous idea that one group of people’s misfortune is somehow caused by another group’s existence. And we’ve been here before and we understand that racism and division don’t come from strength — they come from fear and manipulation.

The far-right feeds on despair, they feed on insecurity and on the deliberate neglect of working-class communities by those who hold power and wealth. And they’re trying to pit neighbour against neighbour, worker against worker, British-born against migrant, white against Black — while the real culprits of inequality, those who are extracting wealth from our labour and our public services, go unchallenged.

Public’s faith in Labour ‘shaken’

Long-Bailey then delivered a sharp criticism of what Starmer’s Labour has become under his woeful leadership.

The Labour MP said:

And you know, the very bulwark against it, the party that was created to challenge wealth and power and to hand it to our community needs — well, it’s lost its way. And I was at the local election count in Salford not so long ago.

Salford’s group, we were lucky that we were only one-third of seats up. But those one-third of seats were completely wiped out. I think we kept about two Labour seats out of all of them.

And I watched good people lose that should never have lost. Councillors who spent years fighting for their communities. Men and women who answered calls late at night from frightened residents, who battled for food banks, youth services, warm spaces and housing support, whilst Westminster barely even noticed that places like ours existed. People who worked themselves into exhaustion because they actually believed that public service still meant something.

And it wasn’t them who failed our communities. It wasn’t our local councillors who made pensioners freeze in the winter by cutting the winter fuel allowance. It wasn’t our local councillors who kept the cruel two-child cap and suspended MPs like me for voting to scrap it while children were going hungry. And it wasn’t our local councillors who talked about cutting support for disabled people who were already struggling to survive.

And whilst the party might have thankfully u-turned on all of these stupid and devastating policy decisions that no Labour government should have ever made, the damage was already done. And it was compounded by scandals in Westminster, people accepting free stuff left, right and centre, all the murky business about Peter Mandelson, and people’s faith in the Labour Party and what we actually stood for was shaken.

‘Labour in Westminster abandoned them first’

Long-Bailey pointed to how the party has forgotten its political tradition of fighting for the working class.

She said:

Our communities aren’t just some piece on the Westminster chessboard to be moved about by rich and powerful people. We know that it’s the woman working every hour she can and still lying awake wondering how she’s going to pay the bills. It’s the pensioners who spent 40 or 50 years working their hearts out and now sit wrapped in blankets because eating’s become a luxury.

It’s the lad in a warehouse breaking his back while billionaires are making more money than they are ever going to see in a lifetime. And it’s our community battered by cuts, poverty and neglect and are still somehow finding the strength to look after one another when they know politics has failed them.

Our communities are proud communities, they’re generous communities, working class communities with dignity and resilience running through their veins and they were crying out for a Labour government at the top to fight for them. From what I saw all those weeks ago, it was pain, it was anger and it was the same question asked time and time again: what does Labour actually stand for? And that’s why people turned away. Not because they abandoned Labour values, but because they felt that Labour in Westminster abandoned them first.

Without Labour, ‘what comes next could be very dark’

Stating that Labour is more scared of “upsetting billionaires and newspaper editors than actually looking after our working-class communities”, Long-Bailey says Labour has lost its soul.

In contrast, she argued that the party’s soul came from a working class movement that “demanded dignity and justice in a system that was rigged against them…to confront wealth and power, not sit comfortably beside it.”

Like many across the country, she believes Labour has abandoned much of that tradition, creating a political vacuum that parties such as Reform and the Green Party have moved to fill. Nevertheless, she remains convinced that the party can still recover and reconnect with its roots.

She said:

But despite everything they’re still searching for hope. They’re still desperate for the national party to stand for the very things that all of us do in this union and those values don’t come from dividing working people against each other because the real divide in this country isn’t between ordinary people — it’s between those who struggle to survive and those who profit from that struggle, and Labour should have the courage to say that again because Britain needs a movement with fire in its heart once more.

It’s got to have a movement that will rebuild council housing, rebuild industry, rebuild broken community — a movement that will redistribute wealth and power instead of allowing it to pool endlessly at the top. It is a movement that will stand shoulder to shoulder with our communities and say we will fight for you.

***

And what happened at that local election, it wasn’t just a bad night for Labour, it was existential. It was a siren call that if the Labour Party does not regain its soul and represent the very people it was created to serve, then put simply, it will cease to exist. And what comes next could be very, very dark. Hundreds of years of struggle and fight could be gone overnight. And that’s how pivotal this moment in history is.

Long-Bailey reaffirmed her earlier comments that the prime minister must go. She called for a timetable for transition and a new leader who will rebuild the Labour Party to properly represent working class communities who “deserve dignity, security, hope and a future worth believing in”.

Burnham: Not perfect but ‘better than where we are’

She then touched on Andy Burnham’s leadership bid, stating that he isn’t as left wing as she would like, but that she reckons he’s better than Starmer.

He’s done a really good job as Greater Manchester mayor. He seems to be quite popular on the doors in our community and, while he’s not as left as I would like him to be, he’s definitely better than where we are at the moment. And I think if he worked with every group in the party, and brought the left in on the ideas that we’ve been championing for so long, I think it could be hugely positive.

Immigration is not to blame for everything

Speaking about the bad actors seeking to scapegoat marginalised groups, the Salford MP criticised Labour for poor communication.

She said the party hasn’t been clearly explaining that the issues facing communities aren’t “due to immigration”.

It’s been caused by an economic model that’s been controlled by very powerful people who [haven’t had] the interests of working class communities at heart for over 40 years.

What’s needed for change is a prime minister with “real trade union, working class values at their very heart”. A Labour leader who sounds and speaks like us, and with both feet in the “real world”.

…we’ve got to have somebody that sees outside of Westminster and actually understands what real people and real families are going through.

Featured image via Christopher Furlong/ Getty Image

By Maddison Wheeldon

Jose Mourinho is flying from Lisbon to Madrid to complete his return to Real Madrid, with the club preparing to announce him as their new head coach on a three‑year contract. The move follows Alvaro Arbeloa’s departure, clearing the final obstacle for Mourinho’s appointment.  

Benfica confirmed Mourinho’s exit shortly after Arbeloa’s departure was made public, announcing Marco Silva as their new manager. The timing underlined how quickly the pieces have fallen into place for Mourinho’s comeback.  

Mourinho had expected to start work two weeks earlier, immediately after Real Madrid’s final La Liga match of the season against Athletic Bilbao. But the club’s presidential election delayed the process. With Florentino Pérez re‑elected on Sunday 7 June, the path was finally cleared. 

Pérez has long been open about his desire to bring Mourinho back. Speaking after securing another term, he praised the Portuguese coach as “one of the best in the world” and a figure who embodies the club’s identity.  

What Mourinho will walk into

Mourinho will head straight to the training ground upon arrival, with no immediate plans for a press conference or welcome ceremony. Those will follow in the coming days.  

He is set to bring five members of his Benfica coaching staff with him, signalling a desire for continuity and control from day one.  

His task is clear: stabilise a squad that has endured a turbulent season and re‑establish Real Madrid as a dominant force domestically and in Europe. Pérez has already spoken about the club’s ambition to chase a 16th European Cup, a target that will inevitably define Mourinho’s second spell.  

The wider context

Mourinho’s return comes 13 years after his first spell at the Bernabéu, where he won La Liga and the Copa del Rey. His reputation remains polarising, but Pérez’s backing is unequivocal. The president’s re‑election speech made clear that Mourinho’s appointment is part of a broader plan to reinforce Real Madrid’s identity and competitiveness.  

The club’s political landscape also played a role. Pérez’s victory over challenger Enrique Riquelme ensured continuity at board level, allowing the Mourinho deal that was long in the works, to be finalised without internal resistance.  

What happens next

A formal club statement confirming Mourinho’s appointment is expected later on Wednesday. The announcement will outline the three‑year contract and the arrival of his coaching team.  

From there, attention will turn to squad planning. With the summer window approaching, Mourinho’s influence on recruitment will be closely watched. Real Madrid’s ambitions remain high, and Pérez has already hinted at major moves to strengthen the squad.  

Mourinho’s return to Real Madrid is not a nostalgic gesture—it is a calculated decision by a president who trusts him to deliver structure, authority and results. The timing, the election outcome and the swift managerial changes across two clubs all point to a meticulously coordinated plan.

Now, with the path clear and the contract ready, Mourinho steps back into one of football’s most demanding jobs—charged with restoring Real Madrid’s edge and chasing the trophies that define the club’s identity.

Featured image via Getty/Angel Martinez

By Faz Ali

Serena Williams walked back into professional tennis after nearly four years away and immediately reminded the sport what she still carries: presence, power, and a competitive edge that hasn’t dimmed with time.

At 44, the 23‑time Grand Slam singles champion made a winning comeback in the doubles event at Queen’s, partnering 17‑year‑old Canadian Victoria Mboko to defeat third seeds Nicole Melichar‑Martinez and Erin Routliffe 7‑6 (7‑2) 6‑2. It was Williams’ first professional match since the 2022 US Open, and her first ever appearance at the historic Queen’s Club.

The reception matched the moment. A standing ovation greeted her as she stepped onto the Andy Murray Arena, a venue she had never played during her singles career. The response was warm, loud, and unmistakably appreciative of a player whose legacy stretches far beyond the numbers.

Serena Williams sets the tone

Williams and Mboko, an unseeded pairing with a 27‑year age gap, settled quickly into the contest. Williams’ serve was still heavy, still explosive and it clocked speeds up to 120 mph, a reminder that her trademark weapon remains intact.

The early break they secured didn’t hold, with Melichar‑Martinez and Routliffe recovering to force a tie‑break. The tie‑break belonged entirely to Williams and Mboko. They were confidently hitting, with smart court coverage, and a composed finish saw them take it 7‑2.

It was the kind of opening set that signalled Williams wasn’t here for nostalgia. She was here to compete.

Control and a calm finish

The second set was more straightforward, with Williams and Mboko secured a double break, tightening their grip on the match as the crowd leaned into every point. Williams fired two aces in the final game, closing out the win with the kind of authority that defined her peak years.

For a player who has spoken openly about “evolving” away from tennis rather than retiring, this was a return that looked natural, not forced. The movement was sharp, the timing improved as the match went on, and the partnership with Mboko, despite being brand new, clicked immediately.

A win achieved with ease, not expectation

Williams credited Mboko for her composure and impact, noting how naturally their games meshed despite having never played together before. The teenager held her own in the big moments, matching Williams’ intensity and contributing key points in both sets.

The dynamic was clear: Williams’ experience and power paired with Mboko’s energy and athleticism created a balanced, effective team. Their quarter-final opponents Leylah Fernandez and Laura Siegemund, will offer a different test, but the early signs suggest Williams and Mboko are more than just a feel‑good story.

Why Queen’s? 

Williams’ decision to return at Queen’s raised eyebrows, but her explanation was characteristically straightforward. With her children out of school for the summer and a desire to play at a venue she had only ever watched from afar, the timing made sense.

Queen’s has long been a staple of the men’s grass‑court season, but its expansion to include women’s events created an opportunity Williams had never previously been able to take. For a player who has spent her career breaking norms, her debut at 44 felt fitting.

Just Tennis

Ahead of the tournament, Williams made it clear she had nothing to prove. Her competitive comeback wasn’t framed as a chase for records or a final push toward another major. Instead, it was about enjoyment, a fresh challenge, and reconnecting with a sport she shaped for more than two decades.

Her schedule reflects that mindset. She is set to play doubles at the Berlin Open next week, but has not confirmed whether she will enter Wimbledon. The door is open, but there is no rush, no pressure, no narrative being forced.

A return that resonates without hype

Williams’ comeback doesn’t need over‑dramatization.

It is a story rooted in longevity, not sentiment. Williams’ presence alone elevates any court she steps on, but her level of play, sharp, purposeful, competitive, is what makes this return meaningful.

The quarter‑final at Queen’s will offer a clearer picture of where Williams’ game sits in a competitive context. Fernandez and Siegemund are experienced, tactically smart, and comfortable on grass. It will be a different kind of test, one that requires rhythm and cohesion.

Williams has already achieved something significant: she has returned to professional tennis with a win, with authority, and with the same unmistakable aura that defined her prime.

Whether this comeback becomes a short chapter or a longer run, Serena Williams is clearly still a dazzling powerhouse.

Featured image via Getty/Paul Harding

By Faz Ali

If you’ve logged on to Twitter over the past few days, there’s one thing you’ve definitely seen, and that’s an image of Nigel Farage beating the governor of the Bank of England:

As it turns out, these deepfakes are being used to lure Farage fans into some sort of crypto scam. And the reason these scammers are using Farage as a lure is no doubt because the Reform leader has promoted crypto himself.

And this guy says he’s looking out for his supporters!

Farage de-bankered

If you’ve seen one image of Farage beating the Bank of England’s Andrew Bailey, you’ve seen several:

pic.twitter.com/b8lN9H4fwm

— MR B.E (@British_Enjoyer) June 9, 2026

The above image – in which Farage has a shooter – proclaims that “Britain needs to see this”. This suggests there was a live broadcast of Question Time in which the Reform leader pulled a gun on another guest, and that this somehow slipped under the radar.

In another image, things got so serious that America had to send one of their police officers over:

pic.twitter.com/Mcu3uM5KnP

— MR B.E (@British_Enjoyer) June 9, 2026

At this point, it’s almost like collecting Pokémon cards. And while the majority of the Pokémon in question are evolutions of Nigel Farage, there is now some variety:

Relieved to see a bit of variation from the meme accountshttps://t.co/n3Frfbvo2q

— Jessica Elgot (@jessicaelgot) June 9, 2026

We personally haven’t seen one of the rare/shiny Ed Milibands, but good luck catching them all.

Some questioned if the Faragalanche is a sign that Elon Musk’s advertising platform is struggling to attract serious clients:

All the ads in my Twitter feed are just AI images of Nigel Farage getting into fights on the set of Question Time.

This platform has to be losing so much money. pic.twitter.com/PhUj5yn3LV

— Tom Nicholas | Watch SLOW NEWS DAY on Nebula! (@Tom_Nicholas) June 9, 2026

Ironically, as the BBC highlighted:

Many of the adverts viewed by the BBC were posted by X user accounts with blue ticks – a symbol indicating a subscription to the platform’s Premium tier.

Platform owner Elon Musk previously touted changes to the verification badge as “the only realistic way to address advanced AI bot swarms taking over” after buying Twitter.

You can laugh at how ridiculous these images are, but the fact that there are so many demonstrates they’re working. People are clicking these. But what are they clicking themselves into?

Age of the Scam

According to the BBC:

By hovering over the links for some of the original posts used in the adverts, the BBC was able to identify that many of them would direct people to sites promoting AI cryptocurrency trading schemes or apps.

Hang on a minute, aren’t AI crypto schemes good? Because we seem to remember Nigel Farage promoting them?

I will be speaking at @TheBitcoinConf from 10pm UK time.

One-in-four 18 to 34 years olds own crypto.

Reform will take them seriously. https://t.co/LgyJdZ6FFe

— Nigel Farage MP (@Nigel_Farage) May 29, 2025

“Take them seriously”, he said, as his wealthy backers rubbed their hands together. And lest we forget, Farage took £5m from a foreign-based crypto billionaire, and has been ducking media scrutiny since we learned of this:

Later this week it will have been 50 days since @Nigel_Farage last held a press conference.

Given he's had so long to get his story straight, @annaturley is calling on Farage to answer 50 key questions about his secret £5 million "gift". It's time he finally came clean. pic.twitter.com/G6ol6ZtiL7

— Labour Press (@labourpress) June 7, 2026

Here he is in April promoting the crypto scheme of former Tory chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng – the man who delivered the disastrous mini-budget:

BREAKING: Nigel Farage has purchased £2m of Bitcoin for Stack BTC – becoming the first sitting MP and the first UK political party leader in history to publicly buy Bitcoin.

A landmark moment for Bitcoin in British politics.$STAK @Nigel_Farage @blockchain @kwasi_stackbtc… pic.twitter.com/O614kKe5TN

— Stack BTC (@stackbtc_) April 13, 2026

No, Kwasi: your company gave Farage a sweetheart deal. A bonus he can exercise in just two years. Ordinary shareholders don't have this.

The penny-share nature of your firm means Farage is already ~£200k up (+93%). With crypto, hype creates value. https://t.co/maRks88jMO https://t.co/5v9a9j7m5K

— Fraser Nelson (@FraserNelson) April 13, 2026

Aren’t Reform supposed to be an antidote to the failed Tories?

People say that cryptocurrencies have no actual use. They say that because they’re too volatile to use as – you know – currency. Saying they’re ‘useless’, however, ignores two clear use cases:

1. Purchasing contraband outside the ordinary financial system.
2. Scams.

On the latter, Morgan Stanley writes:

• Scammers target cryptocurrency because transfers are fast and typically irreversible.

• Americans lose billions of dollars to crypto scammers each year, often through “too good to be true” tactics like doubling your investments, fake giveaways or job-fee scams.

While the above relates to Americans, don’t worry; Farage and his ilk are determined to import all of America’s ills. And for a sign of what that will look like should Farage take power, just look at what his buddy Trump has been up to:

The $TRUMP meme coin is one of four crypto projects that have turned into a financial jackpot for the president's family and a very bad bet for buyers. https://t.co/mg2JIJvnem

— HuffPost (@HuffPost) June 9, 2026

The Official Trump Meme Coin has now lost 98% of its value.
Elected officials should not be issuing, promoting, and profiting from speculative financial assets.
This should be illegal. pic.twitter.com/Bd1JV57SnI

— Peter Mallouk (@PeterMallouk) June 9, 2026

Since taking office last year, the Trump family has amassed a staggering $2.3 billion fortune from crypto deals alone.

Any crypto legislation needs to stop the massive conflict of interests posed by Donald Trump and his family’s crypto ventures. pic.twitter.com/agarS1SuPV

— Elizabeth Warren (@SenWarren) June 9, 2026

Cattle

Here’s what Farage said about the ads, as reported by the BBC:

Speaking to broadcasters during a visit to Grangemouth on Tuesday, [Farage] added that he did not know “whether to laugh or whether to be angry” about the fake ads.

“The trouble is it’s an AI fake but it looks real in every way, and people know that the governor and I have had our disagreements over things over the years,” he said.

You’ll notice he didn’t go into detail about what the ads were pushing. He couldn’t; if he did, he’d be drawing attention to the fact that crypto is the biggest scam since snake oil.

In all likelihood, the people who are falling for these scams are doing so because they’ve bought into Farage’s shtick. This means many of them are the sort of people who deserve to get ripped off. It’s a problem for Farage, anyway, because the thing they’re getting ripped off by is the thing he’s telling them to invest in.

The question is this: is it a problem because they’re getting ripped off? Or is it a problem because they’re getting ripped off without Farage himself profiting?

Featured image via Paul Reid (Getty Images)

By Willem Moore

Racist thugs have carried out a wave of pogroms in Belfast and nearby towns, setting fire to homes belonging to people of colour. The rioters also attacked businesses that they thought were the property of ‘foreigners’, ignited vehicles, and blocked roads.

The hate crimes followed an attack carried out in North Belfast, allegedly by a Sudanese man on the evening of Monday June 8. Footage shows the assailant on top of another man, with the attacker using a large knife to stab his victim. Police have charged the alleged perpetrator with attempted murder. The BBC reported on the status of the victim, saying:

A man in his 40s remains in hospital with serious injuries to his eyes, neck and back…

Since the attack, racist groups across social media have attempted to whip up a frenzy, using sensationalised imagery of the attack to exacerbate outrage. The Official Protestant Coalition page, notorious for attempting to incite riots, has subsequently celebrated the carnage. They have posted numerous scenes of destruction alongside heart emojis.

Concerned Parents Newtownabbey (CPN), whose racist and Islamophobic displays are responsible for creating a climate in which hate flourishes, sought to aid the destruction by urging people to turn off Ring doorbells and CCTV. This was to ensure hooligans would be less likely to be caught on camera.

Belfast: vile racists burn homes

Spurred on by this climate, mobs of masked white men set about wrecking the city and driving innocent families from their homes. In the area where CPN have put their hateful AI-generated abominations, hundreds of masked men roamed the area and set fire to vehicles.

On the Newtownards Road in East Belfast, thugs set a bus on fire. Footage on the X account BreakinNewz shows criminals entering a terraced house and setting the property on fire. One shouts “fuck the foreigners!”.

#Breaking #Ireland Footage showing multiple houses holding migrants have been set on fire in Belfast. pic.twitter.com/XztgrogOLF

— BreakinNewz (@BreakinNewz01) June 9, 2026

In a reply to the same tweet, drone footage shows houses burning in what may be the aftermath of the first attack shown, or one of the other numerous acts of ethnic cleansing carried out by racist mobs. The Canary spoke to local activists working in migrant support networks, who said thugs torched at least ten homes. Countless more have fled their homes in terror.

The worst violence took place in loyalist locales, though there were also reports of small groups from nationalist areas taking part in the disorder.

The Northern Ireland Fire & Rescue Service (NIFRS) said they had:

…managed 256 calls resulting in attendance at 62 incidents.

NIFRS brought in “21 fire appliances” (usually meaning fire trucks) from across the north of Ireland to deal with the chaos.

DUP and TUV stir up mob

Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) politicians have performed their usual cynical dance of calling for calm, while simultaneously inciting a febrile atmosphere by emphasising a link between immigration and violence. Party leader Gavin Robinson did both in the Commons. He connected fictional “uncontrolled immigration” to the North Belfast attack, while warning about potential violent disorder in response.

DUP education minister Paul Givan did likewise on TalkTV. This is, of course, the same man who celebrates the horrors carried out by his favourite ethnostate, so-called ‘Israel’.

Traditional Unionist Voice leader Jim Allister went further still, complaining to hatemongers GB News about “people of violent disposition” with an “alien culture”. He suggested such violence is alien to “British culture”.

Far from being alien, extreme violence has been central to British culture for centuries. It was what enabled its empire to murder millions of people, and British brutality continues to this very day through their participation in the Gaza genocide.

The north of Ireland had thirty years of violence carried out almost exclusively by white men. The island as a whole endured 800 years of intermittent conflict, with British colonialism at the root. Hundreds of white men now carry out yearly violent pogroms against other ethnic groups. The north of Ireland has appalling gender violence rates, again perpetrated almost entirely by white men. Yet Allister and co expect us to believe that this Eden, a paradise of uninterrupted pacifism, has been robbed of its innocence by one Sudanese interloper.

In reality, the above politicians practice selective outrage when certain acts of violence have particular political use. That is, to convince the constituents they routinely fail that the problems in their lives are the result of immigrants, rather than useless politicians.

Ethnic cleansing now routine event in north of Ireland

People Before Profit’s Fiona Ferguson had a more sensible take, highlighting how:

…defence of workers’ rights, the fight for better living conditions, the fight for housing, the fight for public services and the fight against racism are one and the same.

She was calling on trade unions to recognise the scale of racist violence in Ireland and get more involved to stop it. The reality is stark: in the Six Counties, white thugs carrying out ethnic cleansing based on race has become a routine occurrence. It has happened three summers in a row, and all indicators are that racists and Islamophobes are becoming emboldened rather than deterred.

Inspired by a global far-right acting with impunity, and motivated by short-term political gain that distracts from their own incompetence, the worst of the unionist political class are happy to see their own towns and cities burn rather than confront this dystopian reality.

Featured image via Getty/Charles McQuillan

By Robert Freeman

Leaked military documents show how AI helps Israel’s killer drones target and surveil Palestinians. The algorithms also allow the settler-colonial military to gather information and build a sharper picture of the ‘battlefield’.

The technology is added on to Hermes drones which patrol occupied Palestine. Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported in June:

The algorithm independently analyzes the intelligence gathered by the drones’ sensors and cameras, automatically detecting targets, classifying them and deciding whether to track them or pass them on – to the command center, air force pilots or troops on the ground.

The paper said the leaked files “reveal a previously unreported system known as Server in the Sky, or SITS”.

Running on a computer installed on a drone, the “onboard” analytics software uses algorithms to carry out a wide range of unmanned missions that utilize AI analysis and decision-making.

The technology is terrifying, particularly for Palestinians and Lebanese people who live under Israeli military occupation.

Haaretz wrote:

The server and the analytics it runs also allow the drone fleet to be managed autonomously, handing over tasks as the drones surveil a defined sector, shifting the burden among these unmanned aircraft to maintain continuous visibility.

For example, if cloud cover suddenly blocks one drone’s view, or another must break off to dodge a ground-to-air missile, coverage passes automatically to another available drone.

Israel intelligence tech: How does it work?

Journalists said that the documents corroborated reports from ex-military whistleblowers from an organisation called Breaking the Silence.

That testimony exposes “what one source calls the growing ‘algorithmicization’ of the IDF’s unmanned systems”.

The technology can be fitted to both Hermes 450 and Hermes 900 drones. These also carry missile payloads. Hermes are the workhorse of the occupation forces and pose a familiar threat to the people of Palestine and Lebanon.

The system forms a key part of Israel intelligence and surveillance known as wide area persistent surveillance, or WAPS.

Israeli officials confirmed to Haaretz it has been used in the Gaza genocide and and the illegal invasion of Lebanon.

The [surveillance] payload is mounted on the Hermes 450 or 900, holding a set of 10 advanced cameras that use electro-optical sensors that can visually capture – in real time and from a single drone – 80 square kilometers (31 square miles).

So-called “intelligence forensics” allow Israel to “play back video in real time and in retrospect, pulling together different vantage points”.

Analysts use this function to “trace an object back to its point of origin, or reconstruct a chain of events after the fact”.

Elements of the technology are automatic, though reporters said it wasn’t clear what that meant.

What we learnt in 2024

+972 Magazine detailed the Israeli military’s use of AI in April 2024. The Israeli-Palestinian-led outlet warned:

Formally, the Lavender system is designed to mark all suspected operatives in the military wings of Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), including low-ranking ones, as potential bombing targets.

However:

During the early stages of the war, the army gave sweeping approval for officers to adopt Lavender’s kill lists, with no requirement to thoroughly check why the machine made those choices or to examine the raw intelligence data on which they were based.

It seems improbable that civilians were not pulled into Israel’s killing machine as part of the process given such indifferent oversight. The same drones are used by countries like India, Brazil and Singapore and even for EU border surveillance. Showing once again that Israel’s genocidal assaults on Palestine and Lebanon are a laboratory for killing technology with global implications.

Featured image via Oren Ravid/ Getty Images

By Joe Glenton

In northern Nigeria, US-backed airstrikes have killed dozens of civilians, locals say.

The US previously announced that 175 Islamic State militants had been killed in May. US Africa Command (AFRICOM) has a large neocolonial footprint on the continent.

Drop Site News reported this week:

The strikes were part of an expanding war between the Nigerian government and local Islamist groups which has drawn the increased involvement of the Trump administration, with little scrutiny. Metele, a remote community in northern Borno State near the Nigeria-Niger border, has long been affected by insurgent activities.

Reporters added:

Security sources and local residents have frequently identified the area and its surroundings as locations where fighters affiliated with the Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP) operate.

At the time, AFRICOM chief general, Dagvin Anderson, said:

As President Trump shared last night, AFRICOM in coordination with the Armed Forces of Nigeria, bravely and valiantly conducted a successful mission that resulted in the elimination of Abu-Bilal al-Minuki, and multiple other ISIS leaders.

Nigeria: Dozens killed and injured

Reports from the ground tell a different story. Metele’s village head, Zannah Abba Aji, told Drop Site News:

The community experienced a tragic airstrike attack recently which caused heavy casualties and destruction in Metele.

Many innocent civilians were affected during the incident.

Aji compiled a list of 27 civilians killed in the strikes, including 12 women and children.

Doctor Adam Asil Tijjani confirmed that “several noncombatants had been killed in the strikes”. He told Drop Site:

…two women and four children received in the aftermath of the bombings had died from their injuries there.

Those injuries included:

…burns, fractures, shrapnel wounds, and trauma-related injuries.

Eyewitness Goni Ahmed also described the horror:

First, we heard aircraft overhead. Shortly afterward, there were loud explosions that shook the ground. After the blasts, I could hear people shouting, crying, and calling for assistance. The sounds of panic and confusion continued for quite some time.

In the moments before:

Children were playing, women were preparing meals, and there was nothing to suggest that anything unusual was about to happen.

Civilian Protection Center of Excellence scrapped

The Trump administration intentionally axed a new civilian casualty accountability unit called the Civilian Protection Center of Excellence, Propublica reported in March.

The civilian protection mission was dissolved as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth made “lethality” a top priority.

The outlet added:

Dismantling the fledgling harm-reduction effort, defense analysts say, is among several ways the Trump administration has reorganized national security around two principles: more aggression, less accountability.

The US practice of training local forces and backing them with airpower has shattered communities across the world. Trump cancelling a US accountability monitor has certainly compounded the issue.

However, the truth is, this is a US approach to ‘counter-terrorism’ that has thrived under both Democratic and Republican administrations.

The suffering in Africa barely figures in the grand calculations of empire, whoever is running it on the day.

Featured image via Ahmed Kingimi/ Reuters

By Joe Glenton

Fascist Israeli security minister, Itamar Ben-Gvir, has told a meeting of Netanyahu’s cabinet that the occupation regime needs to abduct more Lebanese women and children.

He told his fellow monsters ministers that killing many Lebanese resistance fighters is good but that “arresting their women and children”…

This is what hurts them most.

Ben-Gvir/Israel’s actions met with impunity and silence

As the International Committee of the Red Cross notes, collective punishment of civilians is unequivocally a war crime. The minister is used to getting away with committing and inciting war crimes.

So far, the UK government has not condemned this one. Or even mentioned it.

Featured image via the Canary

By Skwawkbox

Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) politicians have maintained they were correct to stand alongside masked men who hurled racist and sectarian abuse at a peaceful pro-Palestine march.

MP for Upper Bann, Carla Lockhart, incongruously claimed that she showed “real leadership” by joining a 300-strong pro-genocide mob, which jeered relentlessly metres away from the roughly 1,500-strong Palestine-backing contingent.

The latter were taking part in the Great March for Gaza, an event raising money for Palestinians still being murdered by Israeli Occupation Forces. Part of the march on 6 June passed along a towpath beside the largely unionist town of Scarva, prompting hostility from some residents.

Lockhart said she was there to “ensure calm heads prevailed and no one was hurt or injured in what had the potential to be a volatile situation”.

She further claimed to have averted “an absolute bloodbath” through her actions on the day. If the situation needed calming, it was only because the DUP had done everything imaginable to whip things up to fever pitch prior to the march.

The party suggested the march route had been “deliberately chosen to provoke tensions”. In fact the organisers, Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign Ireland (IPSC Lurgan), had selected a route that would avoid contentious areas to the maximum extent possible.

DUP stir confected outrage then play mediator

On the day of the march, Lockhart dishonestly attempted to link the march to republican paramilitaries. She also suggested the slogan ‘From the River to the Sea‘ is a “hate crime given its meaning is to exterminate the land of Israel and its inhabitants from off the face of the earth”.

Of course, its actual meaning is simply a call for one democratic state between the sea and the Jordan river, with equal rights for all who live there. The outrageous falsehood that it is anything else is purely Zionist propaganda, intended to whip up hostility to those trying to stop so-called ‘Israel’s’ holocaust in Gaza.

Lockhart published footage of herself speaking to Scarva residents prior to the Great March for Gaza’s arrival.

In it, she does request calm, and urges residents not to engage in violence. However, it’s a bit rich to get people as riled up as possible beforehand, then swoop in at the last minute and act like the stateswoman. You can’t take credit for defusing the very tension which had been partly created by your own actions.

It’s a little like when people celebrate Britain for ending slavery. You can’t do something obviously wrong for ages, then expect everyone to laud you when finally, belatedly, you cease your shameful behaviour.

At Stormont, DUP MLA, Diane Forsythe, was flipping her lid over what she described as “excessive” policing.

The Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) was indeed out in force, bringing riot cops and water cannons to the scene. The PSNI described it as an “appropriate and proportionate policing operation“. This seems about right, given the numbers present on each side, and the wild rhetoric going out from loyalist groups beforehand.

March exposes nature of those for/against genocide

On the one hand, we’re told by the DUP that “an absolute bloodbath” was on the horizon. Yet on the other hand, we’re supposed to believe a large police presence was “excessive”. This is the non-logic of a party that knows how to whip up confected, sectarianised outrage but does nothing of actual use for its constituents.

IPSC Lurgan correctly said the march was neither “intimidating, sectarian or provocative”. It pointed out what all available footage shows — that participants were “peaceful, dignified and disciplined throughout”. This didn’t stop Forsythe outright lying.

She said:

…when the Palestine walk appeared, [they] unfurled their banners and chanted at the crowd [opposite]…

No such event occurred at any stage. In reality, the two groups on either side of Newry canal provided an unmatched depiction of those for and against the Gaza holocaust.

On one side, those waving the Zionist entity’s flag, hate-filled and throwing disgusting abuse, shoulder to shoulder with politicians that allow the slaughter in Gaza to continue. On the other, an entirely peaceful humanitarian procession, doing what little they can to support those enduring some of the worst crimes in human history.

Featured image via the Canary

By Robert Freeman

Carmarthenshire County Council has rejected Bryn Bach Coal Ltd’s second attempt to expand and extend the currently dormant Glan Lash opencast coal mine, about 15 miles north of Swansea. This followed hundreds of hand-written and online objections from residents in the county.

The decision reflects a clear, strategic commitment to climate leadership, rare habitat protection, and safeguarding the health of surrounding communities.

There are no live applications for new coal mines, and only two active coal mines remain in the UK. One is a large underground mine in Aberpergwm, Glynneath, the other a small underground mine called Ayle Colliery in Northumberland. There is a further proposal (pre-application stage) to mine the Bedwas coal tips of waste coal.

Coal emissions

The proposed expansion was the mining company’s second application. And it followed unanimous rejection by councillors of the company’s first application in September 2023.

The second application reduced the amount of coal to be mined from 95,000 tonnes to 85,000 over 5.4 years, with a slightly smaller area to be excavated. However, the latest application remained incompatible with Wales’ coal and protected habitats policies.

Rejecting this application has prevented the release of hundreds of thousands of tonnes of CO2 and methane. It also avoids exhaust emissions from years of heavy machinery use.

The would-be commercial buyers of this coal, as listed by the mining company, sell anthracite coal to burn on the international market, undermining the company’s claims that coal from Glan Lash would not be burned.

Selling Glan Lash coal on the international market would fuel dependence abroad on the world’s number one dirtiest fossil fuel, whilst the UK itself transitions to greener, cleaner industry and air quality.

Habitats and planning

Beyond emissions, an independent ecologist’s report outlines in stark terms how the mine expansion would have destroyed a further 2.5 hectares of woodland, including sections of listed ancient woodland, as well as over 400 metres of precious hedgerow habitat.

It also would have delayed the excavated area’s restoration (which planning permission originally required by 2019) by a further 5.4 years. The mining company originally committed to start restoring the site in 2018. But it delayed this with successive attempts to extend mining instead.

These delays have coincided with the deterioration of protected habitats on the site such as those supporting threatened marsh fritillary butterflies, whose numbers have plummeted across the UK by 64% since just 2005.

This refusal paves the way to require the company finally to return the land for the benefit of nature and local communities.

With the closest homes just 30 metres from the edge of the opencast site, the application was also clearly incompatible with the 500 metre minimum buffer zone. Welsh government policy requires this to protect surrounding communities from excessive noise, dust, and air pollution and disturbance.

Carmarthenshire Planning Authority’s decision reflects alignment with the Welsh government’s positions on coal, climate, and nature recovery, the UK government’s commitment to prevent new coal mining licences, and the international movement to phase out coal.

Local campaigner Philip Hughes said:

Following yet another year of record-breaking temperatures we are so grateful that Carmarthenshire County Council has rejected the application.

As was mentioned by so many residents visiting the petition stall, we need to keep fossil fuels in the ground, create green jobs, and protect our beautiful county.

Agreeing this application would have been disastrous on so many levels. Coal is our heritage but it is not our future.

Daniel Therkelsen, campaigns and communications manager of Coal Action Network, said:

We congratulate the Local Planning Authority on making the right decision for Carmarthenshire’s sustainable future.

We worked alongside local campaigners to secure this outcome, and we’ll continue to engage with the Authority on the restoration to ensure it is delivered to the standard promised, and to avoid the tragic outcome currently unfolding at the Ffos-y-fran ex-opencast coal mine site, also in South Wales.

Featured image via Coal Action Network

By The Canary

A video filmed in Armagh shows a Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) officer repeatedly punching a grounded man who poses no meaningful threat.

At least three cops restrain the man, with the most violent officer completely on top of him.

Appallingly, the PSNI has attempted to defend the attack, claiming “it was necessary for officers to use a degree of force in order to safely make [the arrest]”.

A PSNI spokesperson gave background to the cop’s attack:

At around 10.30pm on Saturday night, 6 June, police received reports a man had been attacked at a bar on Railway Street in Armagh.

It is alleged the victim had been punched a number of times to the face, and head-butted by a female suspect who then along with a male suspect, is believed to have caused criminal damage to the bar, including smashing a window.

Upon police arrival both suspects appeared to be fighting with each other in the street.

When approached both the man and woman lashed out at police, punching and kicking violently.

PSNI misuse of force must be condemned

Regardless of what preceded the PSNI brutality, there is no justification for repeatedly striking a grounded man who at that point was barely resisting.

Sinn Féin councillors, Sarah Duffy and John O’Kane, have produced a rather weak response failing to condemn the assault.

They said:

Given the level of concerns that have been raised with us by members of the local community, we have requested an urgent meeting with the PSNI to discuss the matter and to receive an update on the circumstances surrounding the incident.

Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP) MLA, Colin McGrath, has also equivocated.

He said:

It is important to remember that police officers carry out their duties in often challenging circumstances.

However, public confidence depends on transparency and accountability when questions are raised.

The incident is strikingly similar to a recent ‘arrest’ made by thugs in Coleraine. They attacked Mohammed Manai and held him hostage, likely motivated by his ethnicity.

Police had accused Manai of attempting to gain entry to a primary school, without providing any evidence. The PSNI subsequently arrested Manai, but not any of his assailants, despite footage proving their violent assault against him.

Recently, Zack Polanski sadly backtracked after rightly criticising police in England for “kicking a mentally ill man in the head when he was already incapacitated by taser”.

The attack happened during an attempt by police to subdue Essa Suleiman, who is accused of stabbing three men in London.

Once again, however, it’s important to emphasise that we ought never justify extreme, needless violence from police, even in extreme situations.

Amnesty criticise rising police aggression

Doing so leads to appalling crimes, particularly against marginalised groups, such as when a thug in uniform carried out the manslaughter of ex-footballer, Dalian Atkinson, in 2016.

Benjamin Monk kicked Atkinson with “such force that his bootlaces left an imprint on his forehead”. 

Amnesty International has drawn attention to increased PSNI use of force. In 2024, the NGO raised the “deeply disturbing” 21% increase in such methods from the previous year.

Recently, it raised concerns about the police service’s decision to bring in a “‘Taser 10’ (T10) electro-shock weapon”. Amnesty International said the weapon “carries significant new risks, with the potential for serious unintended injuries”.

It cites the most recent PSNI statistics on use of force, which show a 36% increase in drawing tasers and a 38% increase in firing them.

The Armagh incident raises questions about whether PSNI officers can control themselves even when unarmed, so handing out new tasers seems liable to pose an even greater danger to the public.</p>

Featured image via Niall Carson/ PA 

By Robert Freeman

Iran has suffered a fresh blow just days before the start of the 2026 World Cup, after the Iranian Football Federation announced the withdrawal of its allocated share of fan tickets for its three World Cup matches.

The move has sparked widespread controversy and led Tehran to question whether political considerations are influencing the organisation of the tournament.

Iran fans left disappointed

Reuters cited the Iranian Football Federation, which said it had already begun distributing and selling tickets for the national team’s group stage matches, before it learnt about the tickets being withdrawn.

This means Iranian fans will be denied access to tickets through the federation’s official channels.

The federation added that a large number of Iranian fans had already finalised their travel and accommodation arrangements. Depriving them of their official allocation, it argued, “contradicts the spirit of international competitions and the principle of equality among participating nations”.

The Iranian Football Federation stressed that the decision raises “serious questions” about the interference of non-sporting and political considerations in the organisation of the World Cup.

FIFA under pressure

According to tournament regulations, each participating federation receives 8% of the tickets for its matches to distribute to supporters. However, the Iranian Football Federation has not disclosed which body took the decision to withdraw the tickets.

It has also called on FIFA to intervene and uphold the principles of neutrality, fairness and the applicable regulations, warning that political issues could affect the atmosphere of the tournament.

FIFA has not yet released an official comment despite requests from the media for clarification on the reasons behind the decision.

A series of crises before kick-off

The ticket crisis comes amid a series of complications faced by Iran since qualifying for the World Cup, against a backdrop of political and security tensions that escalated following the air strikes launched by the US and Israel against Iran in late February.

These circumstances prompted the Iranian Football Federation to negotiate moving the team’s base from the US state of Arizona to Mexico.

After weeks of uncertainty, all of Iran’s players received their US entry visas just 10 days before their first match in the tournament. Meanwhile, several members of the administrative and technical staff did not receive the required visas.

In an attempt to defuse tensions, FIFA announced that its general secretary, Mattias Grafström, had held a “positive” meeting with the president of the Iranian Football Federation, Mehdi Taj.

The meeting followed the team’s arrival at their training camp in Mexico, emphasising that dialogue and cooperation would continue to ensure Iran could compete in the tournament under the best possible conditions.

The Iranian national team begins its World Cup campaign against New Zealand on 15 June, before facing Belgium on 21 June. Iran concludes its group stage matches against Egypt on 6 July.

Featured image via Amin M. Jamali/ Getty Images 

By Alaa Shamali

Kemi Badenoch has announced her intention to “repeal the public sector equality duty in its entirety”.

The PSED, or simply “the duty”, requires public sector leaders to abide by equality considerations set out in the 2010 Equality Act.

Principally, this means working to prevent discrimination against people with protected characteristics (race, sex, disability etc), and monitoring the outcomes of that work.

The news comes just a week after Nigel Farage weaponised the tragic murder of Henry Nowak as an excuse to attack diversity, equality and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.

Vickrum Digwa, a British Asian man, stabbed Nowak, then told police he had been the victim of a racially-motivated assault. The police arrested Nowak even as he lay dying, ignoring his pleas and him saying he’d been stabbed.

Shamelessly, the Reform leader used the incident to claim that the UK is a “two-tier system” biased against white people.

He called for an “end to DEI and positive discrimination” and “a country that treats everybody equally and fairly before the law”.

Badenoch claims laws ‘delivering perverse outcomes’

In today’s speech, Badenoch followed suit, trailing after her further-right counterpart. She claimed that the public sector equality duty had led to a pursuit of “equality of outcome” rather than “equal treatment and equality under the law”.

Badenoch went on to brand the duty a “Blairite legal settlement”, and claimed that she was installed as Tory leader to undo it.

Likewise, she added:

There are many laws which were brought in with good intentions but are delivering perverse outcomes and unintended consequences.

Demonstrating that there are truly no depths to which she won’t stoop, the Tory-in-chief attacked the Macpherson report. After the racially-motivated murder of Stephen Lawrence in 1993, and the disdainful reaction from law enforcement, the landmark report recognised that the UK policing is institutionally racist.

Badenoch claimed that the report “wanted to put right what went wrong with policing in the 1990s”.

However, in attempting to do so, it also enshrined a principle which I believe is wrong: that a racist incident is racist, if it is perceived as racist by the victim or any other person.

This may have made sense in a different context long ago, but today when we look at the response to Henry Nowak’s murder, and the police’s acceptance that the murderer was correct when he accused Henry of racism, it’s clear that mere accusations are being accepted as facts.

‘Fear of being called racist’

As examples of ‘equalities law overreach’, the Badenoch named the Southport murders, Nottingham stabbings and the Manchester Arena bombing.

She claimed:

All these crimes could have been stopped if people had intervened instead of having a fear of being called racist.

An official inquiry into the Southport debacle highlighted that the Prevent counter-terrorism agency repeatedly ignored referrals for the murderer, Axel Rudakubana, because his ideology wasn’t terror-related.

At the Canary, we phrased this another way:

The UK has invested so much in the very idea that (Muslim) terrorism is the greatest threat to our safety that we’ve actively started to damage the capacity to respond to non-terror threats.

That’s a far cry from the police being afraid of being called racist. However, we’re not exactly surprised that Badenoch has failed to take basic facts into account. There’s no other way you could get to the conclusion that the police are somehow too anti-discrimination.

Labour and Reform condemned by Tory leader

In spite of presenting what amounts to a watered-down Farage talking point, Badenoch attacked both Reform and Labour in her speech. The latter were, in her words, “not yet sure anything is wrong”.

Meanwhile, Reform’s plan to rip up the Equality Act completely, as announced by ex-Tory turncoat Suella Braverman, would apparently “make it legal to discriminate against white people”.

Badenoch’s words have been truly vile. She’s ignored years of findings on police racism, yet again betraying Black and Brown people across the country. What’s more, she and others have ignored Nowak’s parents’ plea not to use his murder to stir up hatred and division.

Beyond that, however, there’s something so desperately pathetic about the Badenoch right now.

She’s outflanked on the right by Nigel Farage, the figurehead of a party of white supremacists and bigots. Meanwhile, on her (near) left, Starmer has managed to sleepwalk into becoming prime minister simply by not being a Conservative.

The racist scum that used to vote for the Tories have a white man to vote for now. There’s no level of self-hatred that Badenoch can display that will win them back. One day, she might even realise that.

Featured image via Alishia Abodunde/ Getty Images 

By Alex/Rose Cocker

Donald Trump’s vanity will have taken a hit when fans booed him after being shown on the big screen at a basketball game in New York’s Madison Square Garden.

In contrast, cheers were heard as Zohran Mamdani strode into the arena ahead of the New York Knicks – Spurs game on Monday.

The FT reported.

President Trump attends Madison Square Garden for Game 3 of the NBA Finals to cheer on his hometown team — but as Trump was shown on the jumbotron during the national anthem, the crowd erupted in loud booing. https://t.co/uQCepUP70B

— NBC News (@NBCNews) June 9, 2026

CBS News wrote:

By The Canary

The 2026 World Cup is set to enter a radically different phase in its history, following the decision to increase the number of participating teams from 32 to 48. This expansion has not only increased the number of teams but has also completely reshaped the tournament’s structure, from the group stage right through to the knockout rounds.

This change has led to an increase in the number of matches from 64 to 104, with the adoption of a completely new competition format, the biggest since the tournament’s inception.

A completely new format: 12 groups and an expanded knockout stage

In the previous format, which ran from 1998 to 2022, the tournament was organised into eight groups of four teams each, with the top two teams in each group qualifying directly for the round of 16, whilst the remaining 16 teams were eliminated.

For the 2026 World Cup, however, the number of groups has increased to 12, with four teams in each group, making the format both broader and more complex.

Under the new system, the top two teams from each group qualify directly for the round of 32, a new stage introduced to accommodate the significant expansion, bringing the total number of direct qualifiers to 24 teams.

The most significant change is that the eight best third-placed teams are given the chance to continue in the tournament by qualifying for the round of 32, bringing the total number of qualifiers for the knockout stages to 32.

Conversely, 12 teams will be eliminated immediately, namely those finishing fourth in their groups.

Criteria for determining the best third-placed teams

In the event of a tie between teams finishing third, a series of progressive criteria will be applied to determine the outcome:

First: points scored in the group stage.

Second: goal difference. Third: number of goals scored.

Fourth: fair play record.

The fair play record is based on disciplinary points as follows:

• Yellow card: 1 point
• Sending off after two yellow cards: 3 points
• Straight red card: 4 points
• Yellow card followed by a straight red card: 5 points

If the tie persists, the FIFA World Ranking is used to determine the winner.

Draw for the Round of 32

Once the 32 qualifiers have been determined, the tournament bracket is reconfigured according to a specific draw:

• The 8 group winners face the 8 third-placed teams.
• Another 4 group winners face 4 runners-up.
• The 8 runners-up also face each other in a direct knockout stage.

Final qualification table

At the end of the group stage, the places are distributed as follows:

• 12 group winners
• 12 runners-up
• 8 best third-placed teams
• 12 teams will be eliminated in the first round

This brings the number of teams qualifying for the knockout stages from 16 in the old system to 32 in the 2026 edition, ushering in a new era for the tournament that is the largest and most extensive in World Cup history.

Featured image via Getty/Orlando Ramirez

By Alaa Shamali

Just days before the start of the 2026 World Cup, the latest valuations from the website ‘Transfermarkt’ have revealed which clubs dominate the market. Paris Saint-Germain’s (PSG) rise to the top of the world’s most valuable clubs for the first time in its history, whilst Premier League clubs have exerted a striking dominance over the global elite.

Paris Saint-Germain oust giants from the top

The Parisian club has taken the top spot with a market value of €1.37 billion, ahead of second-placed Manchester City at €1.32 billion and Arsenal in third place at €1.25 billion.

This rise reflects the transformation the French club’s sporting project has undergone in recent years, relying on a group of the world’s most promising young talents and the rising market value of several of its stars, which has seen it overtake clubs that used to dominate the top of the table, such as Real Madrid and Barcelona.

Real Madrid came fourth with a value of €1.22 billion, followed by Barcelona in fifth place with €1.17 billion, whilst Chelsea retained sixth place after the value of its squad surpassed the €1 billion mark to reach €1.11 billion.

The Premier League dominates the scene

Although Paris Saint-Germain topped the list, the English Premier League was the biggest winner in the rankings, having made an exceptional showing with 11 clubs in the top 20.

Alongside Manchester City, Arsenal and Chelsea, the list included Liverpool, Manchester United, Tottenham Hotspur, Newcastle United, Nottingham Forest, Brighton, Bournemouth, Crystal Palace and Aston Villa, a clear indication of the significant economic gap between the English league and its European rivals.

Liverpool ranked eighth with a value of €940 million, whilst Manchester United came ninth with €752 million, ahead of Tottenham Hotspur and Newcastle United.

Notable surprises and the decline of some traditional powerhouses

The list was not without surprises, as Nottingham Forest managed to secure 13th place globally with a value of €578 million, ahead of established clubs such as Atlético Madrid and Juventus.

Bournemouth and Crystal Palace also made an unexpected appearance among the world’s top 20 clubs by market value, reflecting the financial boom experienced by English Premier League clubs in recent years.

In contrast, Bayern Munich came in seventh as the highest-ranked German club with a value of €958 million, whilst Inter Milan finished twelfth to top the Italian clubs with a value of €647 million, while Juventus slipped to twentieth place with a value of just €500 million.

With the World Cup fast approaching, these figures confirm that the balance of power in modern football is no longer measured by titles alone, but also by the value of the talent clubs possess and their ability to invest in the future, making the list of clubs with the highest market value a true reflection of the shifts the game is undergoing within the global economy.

List of the 20 most valuable clubs in the world

1. Paris Saint-Germain — €1.37 billion
2. Manchester City — €1.32 billion
3. Arsenal — €1.25 billion
4. Real Madrid — €1.22 billion
5. Barcelona — €1.17 billion
6. Chelsea — €1.11 billion
7. Bayern Munich — €958 million
8. Liverpool — €940 million
9. Manchester United — €752 million
10. Tottenham Hotspur — €700 million
11. Newcastle United — €696 million
12. Inter Milan — €647 million
13. Nottingham Forest — €578 million
14. Atlético Madrid — €577 million
15. Brighton — €567 million
16. Bournemouth — €566 million
17. Crystal Palace — €553 million
18. Aston Villa — €532 million
19. Leipzig — €505 million
20. Juventus — €500 million

Featured image via Getty/Franco Garland

By Alaa Shamali